No abstract

Exposure to ionizing radiation has potential for acute and chronic health effects. Within the general public of the United States, there may be a discrepancy between perceived and actual health risks. In conjunction with the Vermont Department of Health, a survey designed to assess public perception and knowledge of ionizing radiation was administered at 6 Vermont locations (n = 169). Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were conducted. Eighty percent of respondents underestimated the contribution of medical imaging tests to total ionizing radiation exposure. Although only thirty-nine percent of participants were confident in their healthcare professional's knowledge of ionizing radiation, most would prefer to receive information from their healthcare professional. Only one-third of individuals who received a medical imaging test in the past year were educated by their healthcare professional about the risks of these tests. Those who tested their home for radon were twice as likely to choose radon as the greatest ionizing radiation risk to self. Although respondents had an above-average education level, there were many misperceptions of actual risks of exposure to ionizing radiation, particularly of medical imaging tests. Educating healthcare professionals would therefore have a profound and positive impact on public understanding of ionizing radiation.

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction: Medical student mistreatment continues to be a significant problem despite increased awareness and longitudinal efforts to address the issue. Through audience discussions of a previously published film depicting learner mistreatment, we identified challenges created by student behaviors that negatively impact the learning environment. In addition, the need to address cultural competency in a multigenerational clinical environment became apparent. Methods: We created a film of three vignettes based on perspectives shared in focus groups by faculty, residents, nurses, and staff who work with medical students. We used this film to develop student and faculty curricula elucidating generational differences in behaviors and expectations while also exploring the learner's role in creating a more positive learning environment. Results: Our film was presented to medical education professionals at faculty development workshops and meetings, clerkship students at orientation sessions, residents as part of residents-as-teachers curricula, and faculty at departmental grand rounds. Evaluation data from 176 students and 42 faculty showed that a majority of our participants believed the film accurately reflected challenges they faced in the learning environment and felt better equipped to address them. Discussion: Film is an effective way to stimulate discussion about complex interactions in the clinical learning environment. Divergent perspectives on behaviors depicted in the film served as a stimulus to create targeted curricula for faculty and student education. Stimulating dialogue through film may enhance understanding and empathy among disparate groups, which is likely to be a necessary step for lasting change.