Doctoral profile of the medical radiation sciences: a baseline for Australia and New Zealand

Mind the gap: Gender disparities in authorship in the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences

INTRODUCTION

Research studies tracking gender and academic publication productivity in healthcare find gender disparities in research activity, publication, and authorship. Article authorship is one of the important metrics to track when seeking to understand gender inequality in academic career advancement. Research on gender disparities in publication productivity in the field of Medical Radiation Science (MRS) is very limited thus this study analyses and explains potential gender differences in article authorship and acceptance for publication in the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences (JMIRS) for a 5-year period (2017-2021).

METHODS

Gender was inferred based on the author's first name or title (e.g., Mr, Mrs or Ms). For those who left the title blank or reported as 'Dr' or 'Prof,' a series of steps were taken to identify their gender. Where gender was impossible to ascribe, these authors were excluded. Descriptive and inferential statistics are reported for the study population. Descriptive and inferential statistics are used. Percentages of females are reported, and males constitute the other portion. Chi-square, slope analysis and z-tests were used to test hypotheses.

RESULTS

Results show that female authorship overall and in all categories of authorship placement (i.e., first, last and corresponding) increased over the timeframe reviewed. The percentage gain in the increase was higher than that for male authorship. However, male authorship started from a higher baseline in 2017 and has also increased year on year and overall, as well as in each placement category examined. More female authors were in the MRS sub-specialism Radiation Therapy (RT) than in the other MRS sub-specialisms. Analysis of the acceptance rate of articles with female authors shows a weak downward trend, and this may be related to higher submission and acceptance rates of articles by male authors during the same period.

CONCLUSION

Male authors are overrepresented in all categories, which raises questions about the persistence of gender disparities in JMIRS authorship and article acceptance. Positive trends in female authorship indicate progress, yet there is the persistence of the significant under-representation of women in the Medical Radiation Sciences workforce in academic publishing. Recruiting more males to address the gender imbalance in the profession should not be at the expense of females' career progression.

Research activity among diagnostic and therapeutic radiographers: An international survey

INTRODUCTION

Various national solutions have been considered and implemented to address the factors which limit radiographer engagement in conducting research. Nevertheless, national literature continues to suggest that radiographer engagement in research remains low. The aim of this study was to extend the existing evidence base by conducting an international survey to assess diagnostic radiographers and therapeutic radiographers involvement with, barriers to and support mechanisms for research.

METHODS

Data collection was obtained via an online questionnaire which was distributed by the International Society of Radiographers and Radiologic Technologists (ISRRT). The study population included an international sample of qualified diagnostic radiographers and therapeutic radiographers across clinical and academic contexts in a variety of different roles such as clinical practice, management, education and research.

RESULTS

In total, 420 diagnostic radiographers and therapeutic radiographers completed the survey. Multiple reasons were identified that were considered to inhibit respondents from conducting research. 69.3% indicated a combination of reasons for lack of engagement with research, rather than one single issue. Examples of reasons include: lack of time, insufficient research funding, limited research expertise, and lack of a suitable mentorship scheme.

CONCLUSION

A minor segment of survey respondents indicated involvement in research activity. Lack of dedicated time to research, mentors, and funding were among the main barriers to conduct research. Further research is required to explore what solutions are available to overcoming the barriers.

Exploring Radiographers' Engagement in Research: Motivation and Barriers in Five Arab Countries

(1) Background: This study aims to comprehensively understand the motivations driving radiographers in five Arab countries to engage in research. (2) Methods: A cross-sectional study employing an anonymous online survey was conducted for 12 weeks from May to July 2023. The study sample consisted of 250 radiographers, with equal representation from Iraq, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Sudan, and the United Arab Emirates. (3) Results: Overall, the participants showed limited involvement in research-related activities in all five countries, particularly in presenting at conferences and publishing in peer-reviewed journals. Most participants believed research positively impacts their professional development (34.8%) and patient care and outcomes (40%). The participants perceived professional development (36.4%) as a key motivator for research engagement. A significant majority (81.6%) expressed motivation to start research in clinical practice. A total of 66.8% found research opportunities available during clinical practice. Barriers included time constraints (56%), limited resources (47.2%), and lack of support and skills (33.2% and 32%, respectively). (4) Conclusion: This study emphasises the need for targeted strategies to enhance research engagement among radiographers in the Arab region. Addressing barriers, such as time constraints and resource limitations, while leveraging intrinsic motivators, such as professional development, is crucial for fostering a culture of research-driven excellence in radiography.

An investigation into academic career pathways across Radiography education centres internationally

INTRODUCTION

Robust academic pathways are critical to support of radiography faculty within third level education. As the profession of Radiography grows its' research activity, it is important that academic opportunities meet the needs of the profession. The purpose of this research was to investigate current academic career pathways across radiography education centres internationally.

METHODS

An online survey was developed and administered to radiography academics and clinical/academic staff members internationally. The survey questions (n = 28) include demographic data; teaching and research requirements; academic promotion criteria; identification of the challenges and benefits of being an academic, including equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) matters.

RESULTS

A total of 175 responses were obtained (6 continents and 39 countries), with a variety of experience levels amongst academics that primarily held permanent work contracts. Regarding the highest qualifications held, 31.4% (n = 55) had a Doctorate and 45.7% (n = 80) a Master's degree, and most respondents were employed as academic lecturers (40.6%; n = 71), with 17.7% (n = 31) employed at professorial level. The minimum time requirement to achieve a permanent contract was variable, ranging from no delay (5.7%; n = 10) to more than 10 years (12.6%; n = 22). Doctorate qualification is currently not necessary in order to career progression for 126 (72%) respondents, while 52% (n = 91) provided specific research requirements. 106 (60.6%) respondents indicated that their institution has EDI policy.

CONCLUSION

This study has captured details related to academic pathways across international radiography education centres. Whilst some heterogeneity exists, there are numerous differences impacting standardised academic career opportunities for Radiography academics. These may challenge academic career opportunities and discourage those interested in an academic career.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The profile and educational background of these academics has been highlighted as well as the perceived barriers and advantages of a career in academic.

Driving professional development and growth through research: a commentary

Research remains one of the essential elements that drive the growth of a profession since it contributes to the development of knowledge. Research also creates value for public service and leads to better health outcomes. Research output from the Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences (MIRS) profession is currently lacking in New Zealand while the output from Australia can also be improved. For research to be improved, there needs to be intentionality. This commentary presents proposed considerations that could contribute toward increasing research impact and research output in the MIRS profession in Australia and New Zealand.

What motivates radiographers to start working with research?

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to investigate the motivation and barriers of clinical radiographers to work with research in a Danish clinical setting.

METHODS

The project was designed as a mixed method explorative study, including survey and focus group interviews. A paper based survey was distributed to clinical radiographers, with a bachelor's degree (few with a diploma in Radiography), at three departments of radiology. The survey collected data on motivation, challenges, and barriers in relation to research in clinical practice. Thematic analyses were performed according to the nature of the survey and used to categorize statements. The focus group interview included five managing radiographers (3 with a bachelor's degree) who formed part of the clinical management at their respective departments.

RESULTS

The survey resulted in 39 responses with an overall response rate of 56%. The majority of clinical radiographers were female (69%, n = 27) and 12 were male.Most radiographers (77%, n = 30) reported interest in research projects and 89% of them (n = 27) found it difficult to dedicate time to research projects next to the clinical work.

CONCLUSION

The study increases the understanding of the motivation and current barriers to start working with research in clinical settings including dependent and independent projects. Clinical radiographers reported to have interest in research. Improvements should focus on department culture, skills, and management support. Clinical Radiographers can be motivated when the departments offer training and support, the projects are relevant to clinical practice and research working hours are provided.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The study offers an insight into current perspectives and obstacles for clinical radiographers in relation to research. The literature on the perception and interest in research by clinical radiographers and managers is limited and further investigation of the field is warranted.

Research demographics of Australian medical radiation practitioners

INTRODUCTION

Advancement within the Medical Radiation Profession has seen an increased need for Medical Radiation Practitioners (MRPs) to develop research skills to provide and access relevant and accurate information to maintain best practice. The aim of this study was to ascertain the current research demographics of Australian Medical Radiation Practitioners (MRPs), determine perceived barriers to participating in research and to establish needs-based initiatives to support MRPs in undertaking research.

METHODS

A quantitative and qualitative cross-sectional survey of Australian MRPs using an electronic survey tool was distributed between November and December 2020. Participants were recruited via an invitation email sent to Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy (ASMIRT) members. A chain-referral sampling technique was adopted for data collection.

RESULTS

A total of 431 participants responded to the survey, representing 2.3% of Australian MRPs. The majority of respondents had a bachelor's degree or higher (71.9%) with 8.4% having postgraduate research qualifications (PhD- 3.2%; Professional Doctorate- 0.7%; Masters- 4.5%). Of the respondents, 15.4% plan to undertake postgraduate research in the future, with 68.2% having no plans for postgraduate research. Respondents identified lack of time (47.0%), lack of interest (33.4%), cost (24.2%) and workplace support (23.9%) as contributing factors for not undertaking postgraduate research.

CONCLUSION

The number of MRPs who have been awarded or will be awarded a postgraduate degree has increased over recent decades. However, many still indicate a lack of interest in being actively involved in research. Targeted support mechanisms should be implemented to address perceived or real barriers to continue to grow research capacity within the profession.

Identification of research priorities of radiography science: A modified Delphi study in Europe

Radiography science is a new discipline among health sciences. It is a discipline that investigates phenomena in medical imaging, radiation therapy, and nuclear medicine. It has merged from the need to provide research evidence to support these services. The domain of the discipline needs clarification and more research should be focused on its paradigmatic issues. Radiography research priorities have been previously charted on a national level in different countries but the viewpoint has been that of the needs of the profession, not of the discipline. This study aimed to identify the priorities of the discipline. The method chosen was a modified version of the Delphi technique with two rounds. The expert panel consisted of 24 European radiography researchers with long professional experience. This study shows that the research priorities in radiography science are related to the phenomena of radiographers' profession, clinical practices, and the safe and high-quality use of radiation and technology for medical imaging, radiotherapy, and nuclear medicine. Identifying these priorities can help focus research onto most important topics and clarify disciplinary perspective.

Is Empowerment of Female Radiologists Still Needed? Findings of a Systematic Review

Considering that radiology is still a male-dominated specialty in which men make up more than two thirds of the workforce, this systematic review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the current role of women in radiological imaging, focusing on the main aspects such as career progression, leadership, academic practice, and perceived discrimination. Three electronic databases were searched up to 21 October 2020. To identify additional records, weekly automatic email alerts were set up on PubMed until December 2020 and reference lists of key studies and included papers were screened. Two reviewers independently performed the search, study selection, quality appraisal, data extraction, and formal narrative synthesis. In case of disagreement, a third reviewer was involved. Across the 61 included articles, women worked more often part-time and held fewer positions of power in hospitals, on editorial boards, and at the academic level (associate and full professors). Women were less often in relevant positions in scientific articles, had fewer publications, and had a lower H-index. Discrimination and sexual harassment were experienced by up to 40% and 47% of female radiologists, respectively. Our study highlights that women in radiology are still underrepresented and play a marginal role in the field, struggling to reach top and leading positions.

Radiation therapists' perspectives on participating in research

INTRODUCTION

The objectives of this research were to: (1) determine the extent of Australian radiation therapists (RTs) research participation; (2) evaluate the impact of research involvement on career perceptions (3) explore which research topics require investigation and (4) identify benefits and barriers to research participation.

METHODS

This study used mixed methods to collect qualitative and quantitative data using an online survey from a larger workforce study of RTs and radiation oncology medical physicists. Participants practising in Australia completed questions about their research involvement. Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used to analyse quantitative data and content analysis was used to explore qualitative data.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-six RTs answered the research questions. Forty-six percent had been involved in research. Of these, 91% had been involved in departmental, 28% in national, 14% in international and 29% in informal or self-directed research studies. Eleven RTs (8%) had received funding as a chief/principal investigator. Involvement in research was associated with a desire to make a career change. However, it also appeared to be associated with greater satisfaction with career progression and staying in the career. Respondents identified a range of potential research topics, benefits of participating in research and barriers which included lack of time, support and cost.

CONCLUSION

Almost half of the RT participants identified that they were participating in research. Our data suggest that continued involvement in research, and opportunities to participate, improve RT job satisfaction. RTs' research activities are likely to be extended through provision of additional time and support.

Doctoral profile of the medical radiation sciences: a baseline for Australia and New Zealand

INTRODUCTION

Research is critical to evidence-based practice, and the rapid developments in technology provide opportunities to innovate and improve practice. Little is known about the research profile of the medical radiation science (MRS) profession in Australia and New Zealand (NZ). This study provides a baseline of their doctoral activity.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of MRS professionals in Australia and NZ holding a doctorate or undertaking doctoral studies, was performed using an online tool (Bristol Online Survey® , Bristol, UK). A chain-referral sampling technique was adopted for data collection. An email invitation with a link to the survey was generated and distributed through email and social media. The survey contained questions related to participant demographics, doctoral status, qualification route, funding and employment.

RESULTS

There were 63 responses to the survey comprising 50.8% diagnostic radiographers (DRs; n = 32), 23.8% radiation therapists (RTs; n = 15), with the remaining 25.4% (n = 16) equally split between sonographers and nuclear medicine technologists (NMTs). A total of 40 (63.5%) of respondents had completed their doctoral qualification. In NZ, only DRs held a doctoral award constituting 0.3% of DRs and 0.2% of the total registered MRS population. In Australia, there was a greater proportion of doctoral NMTs (n = 8/1098; 0.7%) than RTs (n = 15/2394; 0.6%) and DRs (n = 27/12,001; 0.2%).

CONCLUSION

Similar to other countries, findings show a very small percentage of doctoral MRS professionals in Australia and NZ. Strategies to engage and support individuals in research, up to and beyond doctoral study, need to be embedded in practice.