Radiation exposure in X-ray-based imaging techniques used in osteoporosis

Recent advances in medical X-ray imaging have enabled the development of new techniques capable of assessing not only bone quantity but also structure. This article provides (a) a brief review of the current X-ray methods used for quantitative assessment of the skeleton, (b) data on the levels of radiation exposure associated with these methods and (c) information about radiation safety issues. Radiation doses associated with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry are very low. However, as with any X-ray imaging technique, each particular examination must always be clinically justified. When an examination is justified, the emphasis must be on dose optimisation of imaging protocols. Dose optimisation is more important for paediatric examinations because children are more vulnerable to radiation than adults. Methods based on multi-detector CT (MDCT) are associated with higher radiation doses. New 3D volumetric hip and spine quantitative computed tomography (QCT) techniques and high-resolution MDCT for evaluation of bone structure deliver doses to patients from 1 to 3 mSv. Low-dose protocols are needed to reduce radiation exposure from these methods and minimise associated health risks

Protocol for a systematic review of screening tools for fear of recurrent illness in common life threatening diseases

This is the authors' accepted version of an article published in Systematic Reviews, 2015.A myocardial infarction (MI) (‘heart attack’) can be intensely stressful, and the impact of this event can leave patients with clinically significant post-MI stress symptoms. Untreated stress can make heart disease worse. Few tools are available that screen for specific thoughts or beliefs that can trigger post-MI stress responses. In other life-threatening illnesses, fear of recurrence (FoR) of illness has been identified as a key stressor, and screening tools have been developed to identify this. The aim of this review is to identify FoR screening tools used in other common life-threatening diseases that report on the development of the tool, to assess if there are any that can be adapted for use in MI survivors so that those with high levels of FoR can be identified and helped

Polish deportees in the Soviet Union Origins of post-war settlement in Great Britain

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:99/26974 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Their Foods and Management in the Cross Timbers

This publication is a creative work fully protected by all applicable copyright laws, as well as by misappropriation, trade secret, unfair competition, and other applicable laws. Except for appropriate use in critical reviews or works of scholarship, the reproduction or use of this work in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, digital imaging, and in any information storage an

Ultrasonic tissue characterization : proceedings of a seminar held at the National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, Md., May 28-30, 1975 /

Includes bibliographical references and indexes.Mode of access: Internet

Developing a collaborative research system for Aboriginal health

The definitive version may be found at www.wiley.comObjectiveInvestigator-driven research and the use of peer review are contentious in community-based research and are particularly problematic in Indigenous research. In this project, we conducted a qualitative study among stakeholders in an Australian Aboriginal majority-controlled research-funding organisation to examine the research funding process.MethodsA steering group guided the project and contributed to the research findings. In-depth interviews (n=18) with stakeholders in the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health were conducted to canvass views on the research funding process and options for alternate processes. A discussion document, supported by an extensive literature review, was provided prior to interview. This research was an iterative process where the discussion document and interview schedule were revised as the research findings informed the project.FindingsParticipants overwhelmingly endorsed a move to a more collaborative research culture, although the form the culture might take varied. Suggested elements included involvement of grant funding bodies as brokers in building collaborative networks and the substitution of named 'critical friends' for blinded peer review. Barriers to changing the research culture to a more collaborative model were described.Conclusions and implicationsA collaborative structure with targeted project development would permit redistribution of the time and effort (previously expended on peer review) into research development and would increase community participation in decision-making in the research funding process.Jackie Street, Fran Baum, Ian Anderso