Research in our practice—a requirement not an option: discussion paper

Artificial intelligence education for radiographers, an evaluation of a UK postgraduate educational intervention using participatory action research: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled applications are increasingly being used in providing healthcare services, such as medical imaging support. Sufficient and appropriate education for medical imaging professionals is required for successful AI adoption. Although, currently, there are AI training programmes for radiologists, formal AI education for radiographers is lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate and discuss a postgraduate-level module on AI developed in the UK for radiographers.

METHODOLOGY

A participatory action research methodology was applied, with participants recruited from the first cohort of students enrolled in this module and faculty members. Data were collected using online, semi-structured, individual interviews and focus group discussions. Textual data were processed using data-driven thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Seven students and six faculty members participated in this evaluation. Results can be summarised in the following four themes: a. participants' professional and educational backgrounds influenced their experiences, b. participants found the learning experience meaningful concerning module design, organisation, and pedagogical approaches, c. some module design and delivery aspects were identified as barriers to learning, and d. participants suggested how the ideal AI course could look like based on their experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of our work show that an AI module can assist educators/academics in developing similar AI education provisions for radiographers and other medical imaging and radiation sciences professionals. A blended learning delivery format, combined with customisable and contextualised content, using an interprofessional faculty approach is recommended for future similar courses.

Evidence based practice, research and the diagnostic radiographer role. An exploration of engagement, expectations and attitudes at a single centre

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of evidence-based practice (EBP) and research in healthcare are widely accepted for the patient, professional and organisation. However, allied health professional and radiographer activity remains lacking; this study aimed to explore this at a local level.

METHODS

This single centre study utilised mixed methods research methodology to triangulate findings from three parallel data collections. Document analysis of radiographer job descriptions (JDs) and appraisal frameworks, retrospective review of completed research activities, and a survey of radiographer perspectives were undertaken. Data analysis included content analysis, thematic analysis and descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

In three years (2018-2020), 290 EBP activities were completed; 287 were audit and three were service evaluations. There were no documented research projects and no entry level radiographer involvement. The survey response rate was 65.3% (n = 77/118). All JDs describe research engagement, but 50.6% of survey respondents did not realise this. There were inconsistencies and lack of clear progression in these expectations and no direct reference to research in the standard appraisal documentation. Radiographers demonstrated a positive attitude towards research and EBP but felt there were barriers preventing activity. Generally, they did not perceive a strong research culture in their department.

CONCLUSION

As part of EBP, research is a requirement for diagnostic radiographers of all levels. There is widespread enthusiasm and a positive attitude from radiographers to engage, yet activity remains low.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

A strong evidence-based culture needs to be prioritised, to embrace the current enthusiasm from radiographers to engage, and accordingly bridge the gap between aspirations of their professional body and actual clinical practice.

Clinical academic radiographers - A challenging but rewarding career

OBJECTIVES

To explain what a clinical academic career can be, what it can lead to for the individual, profession and most importantly the patient, and why these roles are so important to radiography.

KEY FINDINGS

Multiple challenges to the adoption of clinical academic careers exist, including achievable measurable outcomes, visibility & senior support, and balancing different time demands. Equally the rewards are wide ranging and can advance both the individual and profession through role extension opportunities, increased career progression, patient benefits, and academic and research skills.

CONCLUSION

Clinical academic careers can provide advantages for the individual, department, profession and most importantly the patient with advanced clinical practice through evidenced based research.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Improving clinical academic careers within Radiography will promote research participation and increase radiographic roles in patient-centred research delivery and development. Combining evidenced based research with academic skills will lead to improved patient care and better clinical outcomes.

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.

Letter in response to correspondence on 'Conceptualisation of the characteristics of advanced practitioners in the medical radiation professions'

There is ongoing debate on the position of research as an attribute of advanced practice. This letter highlights some issues to be considered in light of recent correspondence published in the JMRS.

International collaboration in radiography research

This guest editorial makes a case for international collaboration in radiography research.

Promoting radiation therapy research: understanding perspectives, transforming culture

Purpose: To identify the challenges and opportunities that prevent Radiation Therapist (RT) led research at our clinic. Insight gained from this process may lead to strategies which can encourage and support RT research. In this way we can ensure evidence-based practises are promoted by RTs as well as enhancing the professional profile of RTs in the research domain.

Methods: A qualitative approach was chosen for this study. Five focus group sessions were conducted to discuss issues related to research participation within our department. Sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis occurred whereby overarching themes were identified, content categories were developed, and summaries were written from these categories. Pre-dominant themes were later presented to the entire radiation therapy department for member checking. Answers to a series of questions were obtained anonymously through the use of iClickersTM (MacMillan MPS, Gordonsville, VA). Further, an open group discussion followed focusing on three key areas (departmental, personal and professional). Initiatives or opportunities that could be implemented to increase research activities were discussed and recorded by a designated note-taker.

Results: Nineteen RTs participated in five focus group sessions. The over-arching themes identified were definition of research, involvement in research and the barriers to conducting research. Member checking confirmed these major themes.

Conclusion: We identified the challenges faced by RTs in the areas of research and development at our centre. This information has given us a greater understanding of the culture of our department and the attitudes to research activities from all groups within it. We aim to use these insights to set-up a framework of support to facilitate increased initiatives. Alongside this support RTs will have a clear understanding of their responsibilities to the organisation that facilitates their research. We anticipate these developments will lead to greater job satisfaction for RTs, increased staff morale and most importantly, the improvement of the overall quality of services we deliver to our patients.

Clinical Research Made Easy-A Guide for Research in Radiation Therapy

Research in radiation therapy is important in promoting evidence-based practice and improving both patient care and quality of clinical practice. However, many barriers have been encountered that have prevented or at least deterred radiation therapists from conducting their own research. These include lack of funding, lack of resources, and lack of knowledge on how to start a research project. The aim of this review article is to outline the basic steps involved in conducting research in the hopes to overcome some of these barriers. The processes of establishing a research question, the literature search and review, writing a proposal, obtaining research ethics board approval, data collection, and disseminating the research results will all be reviewed. It will end with a brief synopsis of drug-related clinical trials and the additional requirements to conduct them. Although many articles have been written on each step specifically, the goal of this article is to give a brief overview to help the reader get started in conducting their own research. After reading this article, radiation technologists may realize that conducting research may not be as daunting a task as one may have previously thought, and perhaps consider embarking on their own journey into the research world. Although this article cites many examples from radiation therapy literature, the actual research steps themselves translate to any research conducted by all radiation disciplines.

Perceptions and Attitudes toward Conducting Research: A Nuclear Medicine Student Perspective

One of the well-established hallmarks of a profession is its ability to generate research to expand its unique professional knowledge base. Health care professionals in today's rapidly evolving, highly technological work environment also need the skills to use research findings in their practice. Practitioners, therefore, need to have the knowledge and skills to competently engage in research activities. There have been a number of studies investigating how health care professionals perceive their role in regards to research. However, little is known about how nuclear medicine (NM) students perceive research and if they see themselves playing a role in the future research in their field.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the attitudes and perceptions of NM students toward conducting research and to explore factors that influence NM students' perceptions of conducting research.

METHODS

Seventy surveys were sent out via e-mail to NM students studying at the University of Toronto and Michener Institute joint degree-diploma program in Medical Radiation Sciences; 21 completed surveys were collected.

RESULTS

The majority of students reported having no intention of engaging in research in the future. General disinterest in research was the most common reason stated for not engaging in research.

DISCUSSION

Though the results of this preliminary study cannot be generalized to all NM students, it does reveal a negative attitude toward conducting research among the NM students surveyed. It has also been shown that general disinterest in research seems to be one of the most important barriers for students. Further studies with more in-depth analysis and a larger sample size are necessary to determine whether students feel they have a role to play in the future research in the NM field and to further explore barriers to research participation.

Radiation therapists and the Internet: a perspective from Australia

The Internet is an important information source for health practitioners; yet little is known of how radiation therapists (RTs) are currently using this vast information resource for their professional learning. In 2007, a four-page postal survey was sent to a random sample of 1,142 Medical Radiation Science practitioners with a response rate of 32.8%, which included 76 RTs. This paper reports and analyses the questionnaire responses from RTs on the use of the Internet to update their professional knowledge and issues affecting accessibility to the Internet in the workplace. This research provides an initial data set on the professional use of Internet-based tools and resources by Australian RTs. It has been shown that the Internet is an important information source widely used by RTs as they search the Internet (89%), access specific web pages (85%), use e-mail (84%) and listservs (49%) to update their professional knowledge. Although all RTs reported Internet access within their workplace, a number of factors have been identified which at present limit accessibility of current quality health and medical information through the Internet to RTs. A large number of RTs were unaware of Internet-based resources, such as Cochrane Library (48%) and GoogleScholar (42%), which support evidence-based practice (EBP) and research. RTs in teaching environments had greater access to computers with Internet access than their colleagues in non-teaching environments (p = 0.044). More RTs in the private sector (22%) reported they had ‘no’ access to the Internet in their workplace than their public sector colleagues (4%, p = 0.037). In addition, RTs in metropolitan workplaces had greater access to protected time during work hours for professional reading or study than their non-metropolitan colleagues (p = 0.000). These issues of non-uniformity of resources across workplaces and knowledge gaps within the profession must be addressed so that all RTs can avail themselves of high quality resources available through the Internet that support them in implementing EBP and meeting the mandatory requirement of updating their professional knowledge.

The research agenda and the role of the therapeutic radiographer: The College of Radiographers perspective

This article reflects on the influences on current radiotherapy practice and the key role that Therapeutic Radiographers have in the management of cancer care and the delivery of treatments. In particular the Cancer Reform Strategy is discussed which clearly highlights the many challenges related to cancer. Changes in societal and scientific understanding will demand that the most appropriate and evidence-based care is provided for patients, underscoring the need for evidence through research, to underpin every aspect of daily work if patient outcomes are to continue to improve. In October 2005, the Society and College of Radiographers published: ‘Research and the Radiography Profession—A Strategy and Five Year Plan’. This is an ambitious document, which sets out expectations for the appreciation and use of substantiated research involvement at all levels of practice. Sections of this document and the relevance to radiotherapy practice are discussed. Alongside this, the career progression model for radiography continued to be driven forward with support from the Department of Health. This model describing higher levels of practice for radiographers, at advanced and consultant levels, clearly identified research as a key requirement for the profession. The guidance document in 2006, from the Society and College of Radiographers ‘Positioning Therapeutic Radiographers within Cancer Services: Delivering Patient Centred Care’, further articulated these expert roles, in response to the changing drivers within cancer and across the radiotherapy pathway. In conclusion, research must become a fundamental component of everyday radiotherapy practice as it will verify professional standards of care and sustain the future of the profession. To contribute to the wider cancer agenda it is imperative that all therapeutic radiographers, from practitioner to consultant level, participate in and lead research.