Radiography journal announces Editors' Choice Paper for 2020

Read the highly commended articles and the overall winner from Volume 26, 2020

Published: 30 June 2021 News

Each year, the Radiography journal presents an award for the 'Editors' Choice' paper, selected from the previous year's five issues, writes Editor in Chief Professor Julie Nightingale.

For the 2020 selection, the Editors selected a shortlist of articles which both captured their interest and, where possible, met some or all of the following criteria:

  • Either original research or systematic / high quality narrative review
  • Displays an international relevance on a current topic
  • Benchmarks current knowledge or pushes the boundaries of radiography knowledge
  • Large scale research (e.g. multi-centre / multi-author / multiple references) or to have potential to be up-scaled
  • Demonstrates rigorous methodology and/or critical analysis of own work and that of others

Our Editors have once again had an extremely difficult task as many articles fit some or all of the above criteria. We shortlisted seven articles for final review which had an international authorship, spanned a wide range of topics and demonstrated the use of different research approaches.

We are delighted to announce that the award for Volume 26 (2020) is presented to S. Goldsworthy et al  [1] for their article entitled:

A systematic review of effectiveness of interventions applicable to radiotherapy that are administered to improve patient comfort, increase patient compliance, and reduce patient distress or anxiety.

Published in our 2020 Issue 4, this article presents a methodologically rigorous systematic review that informs and extends knowledge of what constitutes patient comfort and related interventions in radiotherapy.

It has current international clinical relevance for complex techniques such as SBRT, extreme hypofractionation, 4D approaches, and online adaptive approaches that require patients to maintain the treatment position for extended periods of time.

The systematic review was undertaken as part fulfilment of the first author's PhD studies, who is a recipient of a Doctoral Fellowship from the College of Radiographers.

Six other papers from the 2020 shortlist are highly commended:

B. Møller Christensen et al  [2] (Issue 2): Developing communication support for interaction with children during acute radiographic procedures

N. Moshina et al  [3] (Issue 2): Breast compression and reported pain during mammographic screening.

I. Nakarada-Kordic et al  [4] (Issue 3):Can virtual reality simulation prepare patients for an MRI experience?

G. Haddock et al  [5] (Issue 4): An assessment of the potential impact of the introduction of male mammographers into the National Health Service breast screening programme.

L. Hardinget al  [6] (Special Issue): “Always Events®”… just another quality improvement tool… or is it?.

C. Sá dos Reis et al  [7] (Special Issue): Reduction of visual acuity decreases capacity to evaluate radiographic image quality.

Congratulations to all of our Editors' Choice 2020 selections. 

 

References:

  1. Goldsworthy S, Palmer S, Latour JM, McNair H, Cramp M. A systematic review of effectiveness of interventions applicable to radiotherapy that are administered to improve patient comfort, increase patient compliance, and reduce patient distress or anxiety. Radiography 2020;26(4):314–324  DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2020.03.002
  2. Møller Christensen B, Nilsson S, Stensson M. Developing communication support for interaction with children during acute radiographic procedures. Radiography 2020;26(2):96-101  DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.08.005
  3. Moshina N, Sagstad S, Sebuødegård S, Waade GG, Gran E, Music J, Hofvind S. Breast compression and reported pain during mammographic screening. Radiography 2020;26 (2):133-139 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.003
  4. Nakarada-Kordic I, Reay S, Bennett G, Kruse J, Lydon AM, Sim J. Can virtual reality simulation prepare patients for an MRI experience? Radiography 2020;26(3):205-213  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.11.004
  5. Haddock G; Harcombe J; Jenkins J; Mackie A; Witney C. An assessment of the potential impact of the introduction of male mammographers into the National Health Service breast screening programme. Radiography 2020; 26(4):E251-E257 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2020.03.008
  6. Harding L, Park P, Thorniley M, Ellis M, Reed C, Taylor S, Singleton L, Tolley J, Richardson T. “Always Events®”… just another quality improvement tool… or is it?. Radiography 2020; 26:S20-S26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2020.06.002
  7. Sá dos Reis C, Soares F, Bartoli G, Dastan K, Dhlamini ZS, Hussain A, Kroode D, McEntee MF, Mekis N, Thompson JD. Reduction of visual acuity decreases capacity to evaluate radiographic image quality. Radiography 2020;26:S79-S87  DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2020.04.012