Education and training to support radiation protection research in Europe: the DoReMi experience

Assessment of medical students' knowledge regarding radiation associated risk and its protection: finding from a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

The current study assessed the knowledge of the medical students regarding the nature of radiation, associated risks, and protective measures.

METHOD

A cross-sectional study was conducted among international students enrolled in different medical colleges/universities in Xian, PR China. A self-developed and self-reported questionnaire was used for the current study. The descriptive statistics was carried out to summarize the finding of the study. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were conducted to assess the association of the demographics with knowledge level.

RESULTS

A total of 796 students responded among 980. Most of the participants fell in the age range of 20-25 years (42.6%), being male (67.1%) and having bachelor's education (56.7%). Participants with previous experience was 58.7%. The age group of 20-25 years (p < 0.001), being male (p < 0.001), having bachelor education (p < 0.001), and previous experience (p = 0.009) was significantly associated with moderate to good knowledge. The overall knowledge about the nature of radiation (96%) and associated risk (82%) was good, but regarding protection, 59% of the participants showed good knowledge.

CONCLUSION

Most of the participants showed satisfactory result. However, the knowledge regarding protection measures was poor in almost half of the population.

Vancouver call for action to strengthen expertise in radiological protection worldwide

Ionising radiation has been used for over a century for peaceful purposes, revolutionising health care and promoting well-being through its application in industry, science, and medicine. For almost as long, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has promoted understanding of health and environmental risks of ionising radiation and developed a protection system that enables the safe use of ionising radiation in justified and beneficial practices, providing protection from all sources of radiation. However, we are concerned that a shortage of investment in training, education, research, and infrastructure seen in many sectors and countries may compromise society's ability to properly manage radiation risks, leading to unjustified exposure to or unwarranted fear of radiation, impacting the physical, mental, and social well-being of our peoples. This could unduly limit the potential for research and development in new radiation technologies (healthcare, energy, and the environment) for beneficial purposes. ICRP therefore calls for action to strengthen expertise in radiological protection worldwide through: (1) National governments and funding agencies strengthening resources for radiological protection research allocated by governments and international organisations, (2) National research laboratories and other institutions launching and sustaining long-term research programmes, (3) Universities developing undergraduate and graduate university programmes and making students aware of job opportunities in radiation-related fields, (4) Using plain language when interacting with the public and decision makers about radiological protection, and (5) Fostering general awareness of proper uses of radiation and radiological protection through education and training of information multipliers. The draft call was discussed with international organisations in formal relations with ICRP in October 2022 at the European Radiation Protection Week in Estoril, Portugal, and the final call announced at the 6th International Symposium on the System of Radiological Protection of ICRP in November 2022 in Vancouver, Canada.

The 2019 Bo Lindell Laureate Lecture: On the use of interdisciplinary, stakeholder-driven, radiation protection research in support of medical uses of ionising radiation

Medical exposures form the largest manmade contributor to total ionising radiation exposure of the UK population. In recent years, new technologies have been developed to improve treatment and prognosis of individuals treated with radiation for diseases such as cancer. However, there is evidence of public, patient, and medical professional concern that radiation protection regulations and practices, as well as understanding of potential long-term adverse health effects of radiation exposure (in the context of other health risks), have not always 'kept pace' with technological developments in this field. This is a truly complex, multi-disciplinary problem for the modern world.The 'Radiation Theme' of the Public Health England and Newcastle University Health Protection Research Unit on 'Chemical and Radiation Threats and Hazards' is addressing this need, with a key focus on a genuinely interdisciplinary approach bringing together world-leading epidemiologists, radiation biologists, clinicians, statisticians, and artists. In addition, the project has a strong grounding in public, patient, and medical professional involvement in research. Similarly, the EU-CONCERT-funded LDLensRad project seeks to understand the mechanisms of action of low-dose ionising radiation in the lens of the eye, and the potential contribution to the development of cataract - in contemporary research, such projects will only be considered successful when they make use of expertise from a variety of fields and when they are able to demonstrate that the outputs are not only of benefit to society, but that society understands and welcomes the benefits. Finally, successful engagement, training, and retention of early career scientists within this field is crucial for sustainability of the research. Herein, the contribution of embedded interdisciplinary working, stakeholder involvement, and training of early career scientists to recent advancements in the field of medical (and wider) radiation protection research is discussed and considered.

Comparison of inexperienced operators and experts in γH2A.X and 53BP1 foci assay for high-throughput biodosimetry approaches in a mass casualty incident

PURPOSE

In case of population exposure by ionizing radiation, a fast and reliable dose assessment of exposed and non-exposed individuals is crucial important. In initial triage, physicians have to take fast decisions whom to treat with adequate medical care. In addition, worries about significant exposure can be taken away from hundreds to thousands non- or low exposed individuals. Studies have shown that the γH2A.X radiation-induced foci assay is a promising test for fast triage decisions. However, in a large-scale scenario most biodosimetry laboratories will quickly reach their capacity limit. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of inexperienced experimenters to speed up the foci assay and manual foci scoring.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The participants of two training courses performed the radiation-induced foci assay (γH2A.X) under the guidance of experts and scored foci (γH2A.X and 53BP1) on sham-irradiated and irradiated blood samples (0.05-1.5 Gy). The outcome of laboratory experiments and manual foci scoring by 26 operators with basic experience in laboratory work was statistically analyzed in comparison to the results from experts.

RESULTS

Inexperienced operators prepared slides with significant dose-effects (0, 0.1 and 1.0 Gy) for semi-automatic microscopic analyses. Manual foci scoring by inexperienced scorer resulted in a dose-effect curve for γH2A.X, 53BP1 and co-localized foci. In addition, inexperienced scorers were able to distinguish low irradiation doses from unirradiated cells. While 53BP1 foci scoring was in accordance to the expert counting, differences between beginners and expert increased for γH2A.X or co-localized foci.

CONCLUSIONS

In case of a large-scale radiation event, inexperienced staff is useful to support laboratories in slide preparation for semi-automatic foci counting as well as γH2A.X and 53BP1 manual foci scoring for triage-mode biodosimetry. Slides can be clearly classified in the non-, low- or high-exposed category.

Funding for radiation research: past, present and future

For more than a century, ionizing radiation has been indispensable mainly in medicine and industry. Radiation research is a multidisciplinary field that investigates radiation effects. Radiation research was very active in the mid- to late 20th century, but has then faced challenges, during which time funding has fluctuated widely. Here we review historical changes in funding situations in the field of radiation research, particularly in Canada, European Union countries, Japan, South Korea, and the US. We also provide a brief overview of the current situations in education and training in this field. A better understanding of the biological consequences of radiation exposure is becoming more important with increasing public concerns on radiation risks and other radiation literacy. Continued funding for radiation research is needed, and education and training in this field are also important.