Scoping review: studies involving different populations in radiation science and emergency preparedness.

IF 2.4
Justin M Napolitano, Michael W Rudokas, Lanyn P Taliaferro, David R Cassatt, Thomas A Winters, Merriline M Satyamitra, Carmen I Rios, Preanna C Carr, Andrea L DiCarlo
{"title":"Scoping review: studies involving different populations in radiation science and emergency preparedness.","authors":"Justin M Napolitano, Michael W Rudokas, Lanyn P Taliaferro, David R Cassatt, Thomas A Winters, Merriline M Satyamitra, Carmen I Rios, Preanna C Carr, Andrea L DiCarlo","doi":"10.1080/09553002.2026.2723066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This review aims to understand what factors have been historically considered in studies related to radiological science and emergency preparedness to identify gaps in the fields and opportunities for future research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>2,457 unique radiation science publications and clinical studies (published from 1959 through June 2024), which included keywords to identify work investigating different study populations, were identified across 3 databases. 578 studies remained following 2 rounds of screening and each received descriptive tags. 319 of these studies were included for full-text review, where extensive limited- and free-text fields were extracted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis of study tags showed that while sex was considered in 83% of the reviewed studies, other demographic factors were poorly represented. Furthermore, many of the tagged studies were not deemed appropriate for full-text analysis despite having an appropriate population, representing data under-collection and underutilization. Studies completed by United States-affiliated authors were significantly different than those from other countries (<i>e.g</i>., more pre-clinical research and less human subjects research), providing insight into the regional motivations behind radiological science and emergency preparedness research.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Studies in radiological science and emergency preparedness are published at a higher rate now than ever before. While newer studies are increasingly likely to consider the impact of demographic factors like sex and race, data under-collection and underutilization represent lost opportunities. When applicable, researchers should aim to consider demographic factors when designing studies and collecting and analyzing data, while funding agencies should consider key gaps and whether proposed works can address these gaps.</p>","PeriodicalId":94057,"journal":{"name":"International journal of radiation biology","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of radiation biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09553002.2026.2723066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This review aims to understand what factors have been historically considered in studies related to radiological science and emergency preparedness to identify gaps in the fields and opportunities for future research.

Methods: 2,457 unique radiation science publications and clinical studies (published from 1959 through June 2024), which included keywords to identify work investigating different study populations, were identified across 3 databases. 578 studies remained following 2 rounds of screening and each received descriptive tags. 319 of these studies were included for full-text review, where extensive limited- and free-text fields were extracted.

Results: Analysis of study tags showed that while sex was considered in 83% of the reviewed studies, other demographic factors were poorly represented. Furthermore, many of the tagged studies were not deemed appropriate for full-text analysis despite having an appropriate population, representing data under-collection and underutilization. Studies completed by United States-affiliated authors were significantly different than those from other countries (e.g., more pre-clinical research and less human subjects research), providing insight into the regional motivations behind radiological science and emergency preparedness research.

Conclusions: Studies in radiological science and emergency preparedness are published at a higher rate now than ever before. While newer studies are increasingly likely to consider the impact of demographic factors like sex and race, data under-collection and underutilization represent lost opportunities. When applicable, researchers should aim to consider demographic factors when designing studies and collecting and analyzing data, while funding agencies should consider key gaps and whether proposed works can address these gaps.

范围审查:辐射科学和应急准备中涉及不同人群的研究。
目的:本综述旨在了解在与放射科学和应急准备相关的研究中历史上考虑了哪些因素,以确定该领域的差距和未来研究的机会。方法:从3个数据库中识别2,457份独特的辐射科学出版物和临床研究(发表于1959年至2024年6月),其中包括用于确定调查不同研究人群的工作的关键词。578项研究在两轮筛选后仍然存在,每个研究都获得了描述性标签。其中319项研究纳入全文审查,其中提取了大量的限制文本和自由文本字段。结果:对研究标签的分析表明,虽然83%的研究中考虑了性别,但其他人口统计学因素的代表性很差。此外,尽管有适当的人群,但许多标记的研究被认为不适合全文分析,这表明数据收集不足和利用不足。与美国有关联的作者完成的研究与其他国家的研究有很大不同(例如,临床前研究较多,人体受试者研究较少),这有助于深入了解放射科学和应急准备研究背后的区域动机。结论:放射科学和应急准备方面的研究报告比以往任何时候都要多。虽然较新的研究越来越可能考虑到性别和种族等人口因素的影响,但数据收集不足和利用不足意味着失去了机会。在适用的情况下,研究人员应该在设计研究、收集和分析数据时考虑人口因素,而资助机构应该考虑关键的差距,以及拟议的工作是否可以解决这些差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书