Evidence mapPaperPMID 41511197Full record

ArticleRadiation protection dosimetry2026

External clinical audits in clinical radiology in Finland.

Petro Julkunen, Nina Heinola, Taina Autti, Ritva Bly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation protection dosimetry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Petro JulkunenDepartment of Technical Physics, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistonranta 8, FI-70210 Kuopio, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-0461-1058
Nina HeinolaLabquality Oy, Kumpulantie 15, FI-00520 Helsinki, Finland.
Taina AuttiHUS Medical Imaging Center, Radiology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, P.O. Box 340, FI-00290 Helsinki, Finland.
Ritva BlyRadiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK), P.O. Box 14, FI-00811 Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical audits have been implemented in Finland to healthcare organizations over 20 years. We introduce the outcomes of fourth round external clinical audits on medical radiological procedures following the implementation of the EU Directive (Basic Safety Standards). We analyzed 31 external clinical audits on radiological practices in 2018-2022. The summarized strengths and recommendations from the audits were collected from the main auditing organization's database. 306 recommendations were given, 18% related to definitions of responsibilities, 16% to internal procedural guidelines, 16% to personnel education, and 25% to quality assurance and utilization of self-assessments of radiological procedures. Private and small organizations received less recommendations than large and public operators. Moreover, 215 strengths were reported, focusing on the clarity of responsibilities (21%) and excellence in quality assurance (15%). Reaching and maintaining feasible radiological diagnostic accuracy by consideration of radiation safety requires continuous quality assurance and development facilitated, and monitored by clinical audits.

Indexed as

Clinical AuditQuality Assurance, Health CareRadiologyFinlandHumans

Identifiers

PMID41511197
PMCPMC13092513

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.