Factors Influencing Undergraduate Students' Preference of Health Sciences Specialties.

Background: It is necessary to determine what motivates students to pursue a particular specialty of their choosing to maintain a balance of medical practitioners from various disciplines. Objective: The study aims to assess factors influencing undergraduate students of Applied Medical Sciences in choosing a specialty or discipline. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among first-year students of the faculty of applied medical sciences at Taibah University. One hundred and twenty-five participants were enrolled in the study. The students were asked to respond and complete the designed 9-item questionnaire. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (BM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0, Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) was used to analyze the data. A comparison between departments of the faculty was carried out. Results: 125 participants were satisfied with their current faculty or discipline. They stated that medicine was the first choice (43.2%), followed by clinical nutrition (11.2%), dentistry (8%), diagnostic radiology (7.2%), and clinical laboratory (5.6%). The most important factors that affect students' choice of discipline were helping patients and the community (32.8%), personal desire (30.4%), personal desire and helping patients (22.4%), and job opportunity and prestige (9.5%), with gender variations. Family enforcement and finances were less frequent factors affecting students' specialty preferences. Conclusion: The human medicine specialization was the first choice for most female and male undergraduate students who entered the faculty of applied medical sciences. Furthermore, the most influencing factor affecting students' choices was helping patients and the community.

Radiopharmaceutical Treatments for Cancer Therapy, Radionuclides Characteristics, Applications, and Challenges.

Advances in the field of molecular biology have had an impact on biomedical applications, which provide greater hope for both imaging and therapeutics. Work has been intensified on the development of radionuclides and their application in radiopharmaceuticals (RPS) which will certainly influence and expand therapeutic approaches in the future treatment of patients. Alpha or beta particles and Auger electrons are used for therapy purposes, and each has advantages and disadvantages. The radionuclides labeled drug delivery system will deliver the particles to the specific targeting cell. Different radioligands can be chosen to uniquely target molecular receptors or intracellular components, making them suitable for personal patient-tailored therapy in modern cancer therapy management. Advances in nanotechnology have enabled nanoparticle drug delivery systems that can allow for specific multivalent attachment of targeted molecules of antibodies, peptides, or ligands to the surface of nanoparticles for therapy and imaging purposes. This review presents fundamental radionuclide properties with particular reference to tumor biology and receptor characteristic of radiopharmaceutical targeted therapy development.

Medical Radiation Safety and COVID-19 Knowledge and Awareness among UAE Residents: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Radiologic examinations are valuable tools in the evaluation of COVID-19. A patient-centered care approach encourages patient involvement in decision-making related to their health management. Therefore, patients should have basic knowledge about their disease and its evaluation tools. Therefore, the purpose of this prospective study is to evaluate the public level of knowledge and awareness regarding COVID-19 and radiation safety in the UAE. Methods: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted using an online questionnaire (Google platform). The data collection instrument contained close-ended questions in both Arabic and English. The questions aimed to collect demographic information and to measure the level of knowledge and awareness of COVID-19 and radiation safety. The questionnaire was distributed online using different social media platforms. Results: A total of 1548 participants have completed the questionnaire; 84% were females and 16% were males. The participants' average age was 24 years. Sixty-eight percent of the participants showed a high level of awareness of the COVID-19 pandemic, while most of the participants (51%) only showed a low level in the radiation safety awareness section. Factors such as Emirates of residence and passively receiving awareness information were shown to predict knowledge and awareness level. Conclusions: The UAE public was found to have a high level of knowledge and awareness about the COVID-19 disease. However, the same could not be said about radiation safety. More effort should be put towards raising the public's knowledge and awareness about the risk of radiation in order to enable them to participate actively in decisions regarding the radiologic management of their disease.

Subjective Versus Quantitative Methods of Assessing Breast Density.

In order to find a consistent, simple and time-efficient method of assessing mammographic breast density (MBD), different methods of assessing density comparing subjective, quantitative, semi-subjective and semi-quantitative methods were investigated. Subjective MBD of anonymized mammographic cases (n = 250) from a national breast-screening programme was rated by 49 radiologists from two countries (UK and USA) who were voluntarily recruited. Quantitatively, three measurement methods, namely VOLPARA, Hand Delineation (HD) and ImageJ (IJ) were used to calculate breast density using the same set of cases, however, for VOLPARA only mammographic cases (n = 122) with full raw digital data were included. The agreement level between methods was analysed using weighted kappa test. Agreement between UK and USA radiologists and VOLPARA varied from moderate (κw = 0.589) to substantial (κw = 0.639), respectively. The levels of agreement between USA, UK radiologists, VOLPARA with IJ were substantial (κw = 0.752, 0.768, 0.603), and with HD the levels of agreement varied from moderate to substantial (κw = 0.632, 0.680, 0.597), respectively. This study found that there is variability between subjective and objective MBD assessment methods, internationally. These results will add to the evidence base, emphasising the need for consistent, simple and time-efficient MBD assessment methods. Additionally, the quickest method to assess density is the subjective assessment, followed by VOLPARA, which is compatible with a busy clinical setting. Moreover, the use of a more limited two-scale system improves agreement levels and could help minimise any potential country bias.

Variability of Breast Density Classification Between US and UK Radiologists.

PURPOSE: To assess whether subjective breast density categorization remains the most useful way to categorize mammographic breast density and whether variations exist across geographic regions with differing national legislation. METHODS: Breast radiologists from two countries (UK, USA) were voluntarily recruited to review sets of anonymized mammographic images (n = 180) and additional repeated images (n = 70), totaling 250 images, to subjectively rate breast density according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data system (BI-RADS) categorization. Images were reviewed using standardized viewing conditions and Ziltron software. Inter-rater reliability was analyzed using the Kappa test. RESULTS: The US radiologists (n = 25) judged fewer images as being "mostly fatty" than UK radiologists (n = 24), leading a greater number of images classified in the higher BI-RADS categories, particularly in BI-RADS 3. Overall agreement for all data sets was k = 0.654 indicating substantial agreement between the two cohorts. When the data were split into BI-RADS categories, the level of agreement varied from fair to substantial. CONCLUSION: Variations in how radiologists from the USA and UK classify breast density was established, especially when the data were divided into breast density categories. This variation supports the need for a reliable breast density assessment method to enhance the individualized supplemental screening pathways for dense breasts. The use of two-scale categorization method demonstrated improved agreement. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Larger sample of radiologists from different breast density jurisdictions confirms international subjective variability in density categorization and improved agreement with the two-scale (low, high) categorization. With this variability, a standardized and automated breast density assessment shows to be timely.