Analysis about radiation risk perception among university students from San Carlos de Bariloche and radiological protection experts from Argentina

Pablo Andres; Astrid Bengtsson

doi:10.15392/2319-0612.2024.2234

Authors

Pablo Andres Comisión Nacional de Energía Atómica https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4975-1000
Astrid Bengtsson Comisión Nacional de Energía Atómica / Universidad Nacional de Río Negro https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9666-188X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15392/2319-0612.2024.2234

Keywords:

radiation, medicine, health, communication

Abstract

Radiation risk perception must be studied by communication and radiological protection specialists, taking account of engineering, social and cultural variables. An anonymous and voluntary survey was peformed to enquire about the radiation risk perception among university students and radiological protection experts from Argentina, and to become aware of how it is perceived compared to other health risks. A fifteen-question dedicated questionnaire was designed including socio-demographic variables and questions about work environment, risk perception and risk communication. A five-point Likert-type scale was used for most of the questions. Surveyed people were asked to compare radiological risks in medicine with other risks (i.e.: smoking, sports, leisure activities, stress). The research involved 10 (38.5%) experts, 25 (45%) physics and engineering students and 40 (100%) bio-images production bachelor students. The results were analysed based on the professional or academic background. Although participants considered the radiation exposure in medicine as a low-risk activity, the results showed a disagreement about the radiation risk perception in particular situations (i.e.: living near a nuclear power plant, training in radiological protection while at college) and about radiation risk communication strategies. There is neither right nor wrong risk perception; however, a lot of work must be done to build an agreement between radiological risk perception and risk assessment due to radiation exposure in medicine. It should include working on the design of public policies focused on radiological protection training for health staff and clinical research training for medical physicists and radiological protection specialists, while strengthening communication skills and channels.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Pablo Andres, Comisión Nacional de Energía Atómica

Radiation Protection Division

Head

References

HALL, E. J. Lessons we have learned from our children. Pediatr Radiol, v. 32(10), p. 700-706, 2002, doi: 10.1007/s00247-002-0774-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-002-0774-8

METTLER, F. A. Medical effects and risks of exposure to ionising radiation. J Radiol Prot, v. 32(1):N9-N13, doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/32/1/N9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/32/1/N9

FRUSH, D.; DENHAM, C. R.; GOSKE, M. J.; et al. Radiation protection and dose monitoring in medical imaging: a journey from awareness, through accountability, ability and action… but where will we arrive? J Patient Saf, v. 9(4), p. 232-238, doi: 10.10987/PTS.0b013e3182a8c2c4, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0b013e3182a8c2c4

PEARCE, M. S.; SALOTTI, T. L.; LITTLE, M. P; et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumors: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet, v. 380(9840), p. 499-505, doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0

LINET, M. S.; SLOVIS, T. L.; MILLER, D. L.; et al. Cancer risks associated with external radiation from diagnostic imaging procedures. CA Cancer J Clin, v. 62(2), p. 75-100, doi:10.3322/caac.21132, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21132

AVEN, T. Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation. Eur J Oper Res, v. 253(1), p. 1-13, doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.023, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.023

LUPTON, D. Risk and emotion: towards an alternative theoretical perspective. Health, Risk & Society, v. 15(8), p. 634-647, doi: 10.1080/13698575.2013.848847, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2013.848847

SJÖBERG, L.; HOLM, L-E.; ULLÉN, H; et al. Tanning and risk perception in adolescents. Health, Risk & Society, v. 6(1), p. 81-94, doi: 10.1080/1369857042000193020, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369857042000193020

SLOVIC, P. The perception of risk. Earthscan Publications, London, 2000.

WITTE, K. Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communications Monographs, v. 59(4), p. 329-349, doi: 10.1080/03637759209376276, 1992. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759209376276

ROGERS, R. W. A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. J Psychol, v. 91(1), p. 93-114, doi: 10.1080/00223980.1972.9915803,1975. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803

ROSENSTOCK, I. M. Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Education & Behavior, v. 2(4), p. 328-335, doi: 10.1177/109019817400200403, 1974. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200403

SLOVIC, P.; FLYNN, J.; MERZ, C. K.; et al. Nuclear Power and the Public. A Comparative Study of Risk Perception in the United States and France. In: Cross-Cultural Risk Perception. A Survey of Empirical Studies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, June 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4891-8_2

BRADY, J. T. Health risk perceptions across time in the USA. J Risk Res, v. 15(6), p. 547-563, doi: 10.1080/13669877.2011.643476, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2011.643476

LYNG, S. Existential transcendence in late modernity: edgework and hermeneutic reflexivity. Hum Stud, v. 35, p. 401-414, doi: 10.1007/s10746-012-9242-0, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-012-9242-0

TULLOCH, J.; LUPTON, D. Risk is part of your life: risk epistemologies among a group of Australians. Sociology, v. 36(2), p. 317-334, doi: 10.1177/0038038502036002005, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038502036002005

LUPTON, D.; TULLOCH, J. “Life would be pretty dull without risk”: voluntary risk-taking and its pleasures. Health, Risk & Society, v. 4(2), p. 113-124, doi: 10.1080/13698570220137015, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13698570220137015

PERKO, T. Radiation risk perception: A discrepancy between the experts and the general population. J Environ Radioact, v. 133, p. 86-91, doi: 10.1016/j.envrad.2013.04.005, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2013.04.005

SLOVIC, P. Perception of risk from radiation. Radiat Prot Dosim, v. 68(3-4), p. 165-180, doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a031860, 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a031860

BAERLOCHER, M. O.; DETSKY, A. S. Discussing radiation risks associated with CT scans with patients. JAMA, v. 304(19), p. 2170-2171, doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1591, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1591

RICKETTS, M. L.; BAERLOCHER, M. O.; ASCH, M. R; et al. Perception of radiation exposure and risk among patients, medical students, and referring physicians at a tertiary care community Hospital. Can Assoc Radiol J, v. 64(3), p. 208-212, doi: 10.1016/j.carj.2012.05.002, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carj.2012.05.002

SJÖBERG, L.; DROTTZ-SJÖBERG, B-M. Knowledge and Risk Perception Among Nuclear Power Plant Employees. Risk Anal, v. 11(4), p. 607-618, doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1991.tb00650.x, 1991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1991.tb00650.x

RENNER, B.; GAMP, M.; SCHMÄLZLE, R.; et al. Health Risk Perception. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.14138-8, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.14138-8

WEENINK, D.; BRÖER, C.; BOERSMA, J. How health risks prevention shapes collective identities: a micro-sociological approach. Health, Risk & Society, v. 17:5-6, p. 420-438, doi: 10.1080/13698575.2015.1115006, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2015.1115006

BÆKSTED, C. W.; NISSEN, A.; KNOPP, A. S.; et al. Patient’s experience of communication and handling of symptomatic adverse events in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Res Involv Engagem, v. 5(36), doi: 10.1186/s40900-019-0171-1, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-019-0171-1

CHUA, G. P.; TAN, H. K.; GANDHI, M. What information do cancer patients want and how well are their needs being met? Ecancermedicalscience, v. 12:873, doi: 10.3332/ecancer.2018.873. PMID: 30483353M; PMCID: PMC6214674, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2018.873

SHAVERDIAN, N.; YEBOA, D. N.; GARDNER, L.; et al. Nationwide Survey of Patient’s Perspectives Regarding Their Radiation and Multidisciplinary Cancer Treatment Experiences. J Oncol Pract, v. 15(12):e1010-e1017, doi: 10.1200/JOP.19.00376, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.19.00376

RIBEIRO, A.; HUSSON, O.; DREY, N.; et al. Ionising radiation exposure from medical imaging – A review of Patient’s (un)awareness. Radiography, v. 26(2), p. e25-e30, doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.002, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.002

GHIRGA, G. Cancer in children residing near nuclear power plants: an open question. Ital J Pediatr, doi: 10.1186/1824-7288-36-60. PMID: 20831815; PMCID: PMC2944154, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1824-7288-36-60

SILVA-MATO, A.; VIANA, D.; FERNÁNDEZ-SANMARTÍN, M. I.; et al. Cancer risk around the nuclear power plants of Trillo and Zorita (Spain). Occup Environ Med, v. 60(7), p. 521-527, doi: 10.1136/oem.60.7.521, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.60.7.521

LANE, R.; DAGHER, E.; BURTT, J.; et al. Radiation Exposure and Cancer Incidence (1990 to 2008) around Nuclear Power Plants in Ontario, Canada. J Environ Prot, v. 4(9), p. 888-913, doi: 10.4236/jep.2013.49104, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/jep.2013.49104

ICRP, 2007. The Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Publication 103. Ann. ICRP 37 (2-4).

TSUBOKURA, M.; ONOUE, Y.; TORII, H. A.; et al. Twitter use in scientific communication revealed by visualization of information spreading by influencers within half a year after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident. PLOS ONE, 13(9): e0203594, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203594, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203594

MinCyT, 2014. La percepción de los argentinos sobre la investigación científica en el país. Tercera Encuesta Nacional (2012). Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, MinCyT. Available at: <https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/percepcion_publica_2012.pdf> Last access: 11 Dec. 2022.

5ta. Encuesta Nacional de Percepción Pública de la Ciencia. Evolución de indicadores 2003-2021. Available at: < https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/2019/06/percepcion_publica_2021.pdf> Last access: 11 Dec. 2022

VALENTINO, L.; CASCÓN, A.; BENGTSSON, A. Percepción pública de la actividad nuclear. ¿Se condice con los cálculos de riesgo? [Public perceptoin on nuclear activity. Does it correlate with risk assessment?] Paper presented at IRPA Regional Congress, Havana, Cuba, April 2018.

CEREZO, L. Radiation accidents and incidents. What do we know about the medical management of acute radiation syndrome? Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, v. 16(4), p. 119-122, doi: 10.1016/j.rpor.2011.06.002, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpor.2011.06.002

PORTAS, M. Manejo de lesiones radioinducidas producidas en radiodiagnóstico, intevencionismo y radioterapia. [Management of radiation-induced injuries in radiology, interventional procedures and radiotherapy]. Paper presented at the Radiological Protection in Medicine Workshop, Buenos Aires, Argentina, October 2016.