โจทย์ ปรนัย
What is the primary focus of the paper?

For People with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results, or who were exposed to a person with COVID-19, to understand their knowledge, motivations, and facilitators and barriers to their actions. People can protect themselves and their loved ones by following isolation and quarantine guidance, getting tested, and promptly notifying contacts.

From Experiences with COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing: A qualitative analysis☆ : Nickolas DeLuca,a,∗ Elise Caruso,a Reena Gupta,b Charlene Kemmerer,b Rebecca Coughlin,b Olivia Chan,b Our assessment highlighted specific motivators, facilitators, and barriers to the adoption of COVID-19 mitigation measures. Effective communications require reminding individuals that COVID-19 is highly contagious, can cause serious illness, and may be deadly for some individuals. People can protect themselves and their loved ones by following isolation and quarantine guidance, getting tested, and promptly notifying contacts. These findings contribute to the body of evidence describing CI/CT for COVID-19. To our knowledge, this is the first study of such a large sample in qualitative research to explore behaviors regarding COVID-19 mitigation measures. This work goes beyond describing what people did and provides context as to why people did or did not adhere to public health guidance. Future public health messages, services, programs, and interventions for COVID-19 need to address the barriers, facilitators, and motivators identified in this research to enhance adoption and adherence to public health guidance. Lessons from this research highlight the importance of a robust public health infrastructure and increased capacity to effectively respond to future public health emergencies.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
What is the purpose of case investigation in the context of COVID-19?

to learn whom they may have exposed to the virus, eliciting their contacts, counseling them to monitor their symptoms, and recommending isolation

Case investigation involves interviewing someone who has confirmed or suspected COVID-19 to learn whom they may have exposed to the virus, eliciting their contacts, counseling them to monitor their symptoms, and recommending isolation (i.e., staying home and away from others). Therefore everyone doesn't spread the virus further, and the epidemic can be decreased. From Experiences with COVID-19 case investigation and contact tracing : A qualitative analysis

โจทย์ ปรนัย
What is contact tracing, as defined in the paper?

Contact tracing is the subsequent process of notifying close contacts of their potential exposure,

Contact tracing is a monitoring process including contact identification, listing, and follow-up, which is a key to slowing down pandemics of infectious diseases, From Contact Tracing Research: A Literature Review Based on Scientific Collaboration Network : Hui Li 1 , Yifei Zhu 1 , Yi Niu 2

โจทย์ ปรนัย
Why did health departments face challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic?

lacked resources to provide CI/CT to all cases and contacts Due to the rapid increase in the number of cases in a short period of time and the high costs of treatment, some people do not receive treatment. Some may become sick to the point of death.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, health departments faced challenges and lacked resources to provide CI/CT to all cases and contacts, especially during surges of high COVID-19 incidence (Lash et al., 2021).

โจทย์ อัตนัย
Essay | Examine the variations in individuals' experiences with CI/CT for COVID-19 based on demographic characteristics. How do factors such as age, race, ethnicity, income, and political ideology influence these experiences?

Participants included cases and contacts representing people from a range of racial, ethnic, political, and socioeconomic groups (Table 1 ). Participants confirmed their positive SARS-CoV-2 test result or exposure; age; Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin; race; highest level of education; and political ideology. Age 18-39 36% 65 40-59 38% 71 60+ 26% 48 Race/Ethnicity American Indian or Alaskan Native, non-Hispanic 5% 10 Asian and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic 14% 25 Black or African American, non-Hispanic 28% 51 Hispanic 26% 48 White, non-Hispanic 27%

Virtual FGDs and interviews were recorded using secure video teleconferencing and conducted in English and Spanish. A lead moderator facilitated each FGD, and a support moderator took notes. One interviewer facilitated each interview. All moderators and interviewers participated in a 2-h training to employ an effective, equitable, and trauma-informed approach that valued all participants’ viewpoints (Mathematica, 2022). The training focused on being empathetic to experiences and feelings and avoiding re-traumatization associated with COVID-19. From The Challenges of Contact Tracing as U.S. Battles COVId For example, this survey finds that 58% of U.S. adults say they would be very or somewhat likely to speak with a public health official who contacted them by phone or text message to speak with them about the coronavirus outbreak. Yet the survey also shows that portions of Americans could be hard to reach and relatively uncomfortable engaging with public health officials as part of the contact tracing process related to the coronavirus outbreak. For instance, 41% of those who were asked about their views on speaking with a public health official who might contact them about the coronavirus outbreak via phone or text say they would be not at all or not too likely to do so.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
What is the primary concern raised by the authors regarding the state of knowledge in African urban ecology?

ecology. Recent studies have warned of the lack of information from certain regions, lead to 795 relevant papers from where data were collected and tested to understand geographic and ecological mismatches in research effort, allowing us to identify important knowledge gaps (e.g., taxonomy and scientific fields). We also tested the effect of current and future urbanization intensity, human population density, size and conservation status of ecoregions and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on research effort. Our results suggest a low turnout of papers and a dearth of knowledge about African urban ecology.

This review shows that research effort on urban ecology is still low in Africa, with the exception of South Africa, particularly in the highly urbanized and biodiversity-rich areas of the continent. This continent is an important representative of the Global South, and thus the lack of information on the topic is an important impediment to try to overcome the traditional Global North perspective on urban ecology (Shackleton et al., 2021). In addition, the information presented here could be crucial to achieve the 11th Sustainable Development Goal in the rapidly urbanizing African continent (Cobbinah et al., 2015).

โจทย์ ปรนัย
What significant predictors did the study investigate regarding the number of publications on African urban ecology?

Economic factors (GDP) rather than other urban indicators (e.g., urbanization intensity, human population density) are also crucial to explain urban ecology research effort within the continent.

Economic factors (GDP) rather than other urban indicators (e.g., urbanization intensity, human population density) are also crucial to explain urban ecology research effort within the continent. South Africa congregates many of the papers on the topic, while there are 16 African countries without urban ecology studies, providing clear targets for future investigations. The South African case could be useful to identify specific aspects that could be reproduced in other neighboring countries to try to boost urban ecology research. Thus, studies comparing different urban ecology aspects between South Africa and other African countries would be particularly interesting at this respect. In addition, it is especially worrisome the uncoupled nature between future urbanization prospects and urban ecology knowledge as local authorities will not count with valuable information to take scientifically-based actions. This lack of information has already been suggested as an important impediment to achieve sustainable urban development in Africa (Cobbinah et al., 2015, Patel et al., 2017).

โจทย์ ปรนัย
In terms of research scale, where were the majority of the studies conducted according to the study?

They explain urban ecology research effort mostly in africa continent (72%) and south Africa for 40% and we have data usage in the worldwide, but not the majority.

We extracted the following data from each included paper: title, year of publication, journal, country of study and study sites. We then classified each paper based on type (field study, review or perspective) and scale, which included city (conducted in a single city), local (involving more than one city in a country), regional (involving more than one African country) and global (involving more than the African continent). Further, we followed the classification of Magle et al. (2012) to allocate each paper to one of the following scientific fields, including animal behavior, community ecology, conservation, human dimensions, human-wildlife conflict, landscape ecology, population ecology, wildlife disease and wildlife management. For taxonomic studies, we extracted information on the kingdoms and classes of focal species based on the classification of the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (GBIF, 2021; accessed May 2022).

โจทย์ ปรนัย
What methodological approach did the authors use to conduct the literature search in this study?

In the present study, we conducted a systematic literature review to determine trends in urban ecological research conducted in Africa. Relative to other regions such as Asia, Europe and North America

In the present study, we conducted a systematic literature review to determine trends in urban ecological research conducted in Africa. Relative to other regions such as Asia, Europe and North America (Forman, 2016, Lin and Grimm, 2015, Magle et al., 2012, Wu et al., 2014), there have been few attempts aimed at synthesizing the state of knowledge in African urban ecology (e.g., Cilliers et al., 2013, Shackleton et al., 2017, Lindley et al., 2018, du Toit et al., 2018). Our aims were to (i) analyze the current status of research effort on urban ecology in this continent, (ii) identify research gaps (geographic, taxonomic and ecological) and (iii) provide recommendations and insights on future prospects. Additionally, (iv) we investigated the potential association of urban ecology research effort with some factors previously associated with the number of scientific publications. On the one hand, we tested whether the number of publications in the field (i.e., urban ecology) per country could be influenced by human population density, economic wealth, as well as the current or future urbanization prospects. Given the positive association between human population density and the degree of urbanization (e.g., Gao and O’Neill, 2021, Qizhi et al., 2016), we would expect that countries with high human population density would hold the majority of studies in urban ecology. Furthermore, if urban ecology research effort is driven by the intensity of urbanization, based on the scientific reasoning of geographic focus areas of particular interest, we could predict a positive association of the number of publications on this topic in those countries currently more urbanized or with the highest rate of urban expansion (i.e., future urbanization). Although the relationship between urbanization and economic growth is often contested (e.g., Chen et al., 2014, Moomaw and Shatter, 1996), we would expect that wealthier countries (i.e., higher Gross Domestic Product –GDP–) are those concentrating the majority of urban ecological studies as increased funding positively influences publication rates (Man et al., 2004). On the other hand, we also tested whether the number of publications in the field could be influenced by the conservation status and size of African ecoregions. Previous reviews have pointed out the positive association between the conservation status of study sites and research effort (e.g., de Lima et al., 2011). Thus, if research effort is based on conservation-oriented reasons, we would expect that threatened ecoregions will be more studied. In addition, since smaller areas generally support lower species richness (see Rantalainen et al., 2005), we would expect that larger ecoregions will provide more study opportunities for researchers specializing in different species and scientific topics, and will therefore be more studied. Considering the marked differences between Global North and Global South urban settings (Shackleton et al., 2021), we acknowledge that there could be other factors (e.g., climate severity, colonial history or high diversity in human-nature interactions) shaping the urban ecology research effort in Africa, which is considered part of the Global South. However, we did not include them because of the difficulty of extracting such information and to avoid over-parameterization of models. Findings of this study will provide additional information about African urban landscapes that should generate interest among researchers, conservation practitioners and policy-makers.

โจทย์ อัตนัย
Essay | Examine the key factors contributing to the lack of knowledge and research gaps in African urban ecology, as highlighted in the literature review. Discuss the potential implications of this knowledge gap and propose strategies to address and advance research in this field.

1) strengthening collaboration and networking among researchers across regions and countries, as previously suggested in a more general context (McPhearson et al., 2016). This will allow for larger scale studies that will provide an additional and complementary perspective to city/local studies that tackle more specific problems. (2) Helping the education of local experts on urban ecological studies can be also instrumental to overcome some of the previously described publication biases on the topic (Shackleton et al., 2021). (3) Engaging with the citizenship through citizen science projects. This will allow the acquisition of additional scientific information at the same time as it promotes a better urban governance through participation of urban inhabitants. (4) Use of low-cost techniques like GIS or available databases (e.g., museums) to maximize the scientific outcome considering the economic restrictions of the region.

Based on our review, we propose the following recommendations to promote urban ecology research in this continent: (1) strengthening collaboration and networking among researchers across regions and countries, as previously suggested in a more general context (McPhearson et al., 2016). This will allow for larger scale studies that will provide an additional and complementary perspective to city/local studies that tackle more specific problems. (2) Helping the education of local experts on urban ecological studies can be also instrumental to overcome some of the previously described publication biases on the topic (Shackleton et al., 2021). (3) Engaging with the citizenship through citizen science projects. This will allow the acquisition of additional scientific information at the same time as it promotes a better urban governance through participation of urban inhabitants. (4) Use of low-cost techniques like GIS or available databases (e.g., museums) to maximize the scientific outcome considering the economic restrictions of the region. We hope that this review will help to re-orientate our research effort on the topic and fill in some important knowledge gaps highlighted here to grant a balanced strategy between urban development and nature conservation in this unique continent.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
According to the literature search, what are the four key formulations through which acceptability has been defined or conceptualized?

The literature has converged towards three overarching categories of factors underpinning AI acceptability including: user factors involving trust, system understanding, AI literacy, and technology receptiveness; system usage factors entailing value proposition, self-efficacy, burden, and workflow integration; and socio-organisational-cultural factors encompassing social influence, organisational readiness, ethicality, and perceived threat to professional identity.

The literature has converged towards three overarching categories of factors underpinning AI acceptability including: user factors involving trust, system understanding, AI literacy, and technology receptiveness; system usage factors entailing value proposition, self-efficacy, burden, and workflow integration; and socio-organisational-cultural factors encompassing social influence, organisational readiness, ethicality, and perceived threat to professional identity. Yet, numerous studies have overlooked a meaningful subset of these factors that are integral to the use of medical AI systems such as the impact on clinical workflow practices, trust based on perceived risk and safety, and compatibility with the norms of medical professions. This is attributable to reliance on theoretical frameworks or ad-hoc approaches which do not explicitly account for healthcare-specific factors, the novelties of AI as software as a medical device (SaMD), and the nuances of human-AI interaction from the perspective of medical professionals rather than lay consumer or business end users.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
Which academic databases were included in the search strategy for the scoping review on the acceptability of AI in medical imaging domains?

A systematic literature search was performed across five academic databases including Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Compendex, and Scopus from January 2013 to September 2023.

A systematic literature search was performed across five academic databases including Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Compendex, and Scopus from January 2013 to September 2023. This was done in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Overall, 31 articles were deemed appropriate for inclusion in the scoping review.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
What were the criteria for inclusion and exclusion of publications in the scoping review?

Four key formulations have emerged including user affective attitude towards the suitability of a system for medical usage, behavioural intention to use a system, actual system usage behaviour, and satisfaction following system usage [12].

There are some limitations with this scoping review. The primary limitation concerns how the search strategy was formulated with respect to the intervention context. This review focused on the perspective of radiologists as they are most likely to be exposed to AI compared to other healthcare imaging domains given that significant AI research and development has been directed towards diagnostic radiological problems that require complex analysis of medical images. Although the search strategy was designed to include any medical imaging field, the search terms employed did not explicitly address other imaging contexts (e.g. radiography, radiation oncology, mammography) and attempted to capture all of them using the “imaging” free-text term and “Diagnostic Imaging” search term. In particular, radiography was excluded as a search term since the responsibilities of radiographers primarily involve capturing medical images rather than interpreting them and hence they were not a priority for this review despite their significant role in radiological systems. Nevertheless, this approach could have potentially caused some pertinent studies to be excluded if they were not associated with these terms in the electronic databases searched. Furthermore, only one researcher conducted the full screening process and qualitative analysis of the final set of 31 papers which could introduce some bias into the results. To help safeguard against this, another researcher screened a subset of all the papers including the final set of studies. Additionally, this review narrowly focuses on AI acceptability from the perspective of healthcare professionals and by design excludes the views of other important stakeholders (e.g. patients, nurses, hospital support staff) in healthcare imaging contexts. Finally, this research does not critically analyse the reported importance of different factors to AI acceptability for each study although this is an exercise in evidence synthesis that is more suited to a systematic review and meta-analysis.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
How many studies were included in the scoping review, and which aspect of AI acceptability did the majority of these studies focus on?

only one researcher conducted the full screening process and qualitative analysis of the final set of 31 papers which could introduce some bias into the results. To help safeguard against this, another researcher screened a subset of all the papers including the final set of studies.

There are some limitations with this scoping review. The primary limitation concerns how the search strategy was formulated with respect to the intervention context. This review focused on the perspective of radiologists as they are most likely to be exposed to AI compared to other healthcare imaging domains given that significant AI research and development has been directed towards diagnostic radiological problems that require complex analysis of medical images. Although the search strategy was designed to include any medical imaging field, the search terms employed did not explicitly address other imaging contexts (e.g. radiography, radiation oncology, mammography) and attempted to capture all of them using the “imaging” free-text term and “Diagnostic Imaging” search term. In particular, radiography was excluded as a search term since the responsibilities of radiographers primarily involve capturing medical images rather than interpreting them and hence they were not a priority for this review despite their significant role in radiological systems. Nevertheless, this approach could have potentially caused some pertinent studies to be excluded if they were not associated with these terms in the electronic databases searched. Furthermore, only one researcher conducted the full screening process and qualitative analysis of the final set of 31 papers which could introduce some bias into the results. To help safeguard against this, another researcher screened a subset of all the papers including the final set of studies. Additionally, this review narrowly focuses on AI acceptability from the perspective of healthcare professionals and by design excludes the views of other important stakeholders (e.g. patients, nurses, hospital support staff) in healthcare imaging contexts. Finally, this research does not critically analyse the reported importance of different factors to AI acceptability for each study although this is an exercise in evidence synthesis that is more suited to a systematic review and meta-analysis.

โจทย์ อัตนัย
Essay | Explain the concept of acceptability in the context of AI in medical imaging. Outline the key dimensions through which acceptability has been conceptualized in past studies and why a scoping review considered multiple formulations. Additionally, discuss the importance of considering end-user perspectives in the evaluation of AI acceptability.

AI acceptability need to be modified to better capture the nuances of AI deployment in healthcare contexts where the user is a healthcare professional influenced by expert knowledge and disciplinary norms. Increasing AI acceptability among medical professionals will critically require designing human-centred AI systems which go beyond high algorithmic performance to consider accessibility to users with varying degrees of AI literacy, clinical workflow practices, the institutional and deployment context, and the cultural, ethical, and safety norms of healthcare professions

This is the first scoping review to survey the health informatics literature around the key factors influencing the acceptability of AI as a digital healthcare intervention in medical imaging contexts. The factors identified in this review suggest that existing theoretical frameworks used to study AI acceptability need to be modified to better capture the nuances of AI deployment in healthcare contexts where the user is a healthcare professional influenced by expert knowledge and disciplinary norms. Increasing AI acceptability among medical professionals will critically require designing human-centred AI systems which go beyond high algorithmic performance to consider accessibility to users with varying degrees of AI literacy, clinical workflow practices, the institutional and deployment context, and the cultural, ethical, and safety norms of healthcare professions. As investment into AI for healthcare increases, it would be valuable to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the causal contribution of these factors to achieving high levels of AI acceptability among medical professionals.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
What is workplace violence (WPV) in healthcare?

Workplace violence (WPV) is a recognized hazard in the healthcare industry. WPV is any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site. It can affect and involve workers, clients, customers and visitors.

Workplace violence (WPV) is a recognized hazard in the healthcare industry. WPV is any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site. It can affect and involve workers, clients, customers and visitors. WPV ranges from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults and even homicide. In 2010, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data reported healthcare and social assistance workers were the victims of approximately 11,370 assaults by persons; a greater than 13% increase over the number of such assaults reported in 2009. Almost 19% (i.e., 2,130) of these assaults occurred in nursing and residential care facilities alone. Unfortunately, many more incidents probably go unreported.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), what is the impact of WPV on healthcare workers?

It has not only a negative impact on the psychological and physical well-being of health-care staff, but also affects their job motivation

Health workers are at high risk of violence all over the world. Between 8% and 38% of health workers suffer physical violence at some point in their careers. Many more are threatened or exposed to verbal aggression. Most violence is perpetrated by patients and visitors. Also in disaster and conflict situations, health workers may become the targets of collective or political violence. Categories of health workers most at risk include nurses and other staff directly involved in patient care, emergency room staff and paramedics. Violence against health workers is unacceptable. It has not only a negative impact on the psychological and physical well-being of health-care staff, but also affects their job motivation. As a consequence, this violence compromises the quality of care and puts health-care provision at risk. It also leads to immense financial loss in the health sector.

โจทย์ ปรนัย
Why is there a need for a systematic review on WPV in medical radiation science (MRS)?

Although International Labour Office (ILO)/International Council of Nurses (ICN)/WHO/Public Services International (PSI) framework guidelines have provided suggested strategies to reduce the WPV in healthcare,1 without understanding of the WPV prevalence and risk factors in MRS, effective strategies for reducing the incidents of WPV in this profession could not be determined.2,3 Hence, it is timely to conduct a systematic review on the WPV in MRS. The purpose of this systematic review is to explore the published papers to answer the question “What was the prevalence of WPV in MRS and its risk factors?”

Twelve papers which met the selection criteria were included in this review. Table 1 shows the characteristics of these studies.12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 All but one study investigated the prevalence of WPV with the use of questionnaire,12,13,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and the only exception focused on the risk factors of WPV determined through a qualitative approach (interview).14 Nonetheless, the WPV risk factors were also covered in all survey studies except the one by Trad and Johnson.12,13,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 The included studies were mainly about the WPV situations in Africa (n = 4),13, 14, 15,18 and North America (n = 4).12,19,21,23 A quarter of them focused on the United States of America (USA) situation.12,21,23 Two thirds of the included studies were published from 2019, indicating an increase of researchers' attention to the WPV issue recently.12, 13, 14, 15, 16,18,20,23 Also, two thirds of them focussed on diagnostic radiography12, 13, 14, 15,17,18,20,22 with the others about radiation therapy,19,21 medical sonography,16 and nuclear medicine,23 reflecting the typical characteristics of MRS. The overall WPV prevalence in diagnostic radiography was 69.2–100 % for radiographers' whole career12,15,18,20 while it was 46.1–83.0 % for last 12 months.13,17,22 For radiation therapy, 63.0–84.0 % of respondents experienced WPV in their career.19,21 Similar prevalence percentages are noted in the medical sonography (57.6 % in last 12 months)16 and nuclear medicine studies (46.8 % in last 6 months).23 The prevalence of common WPV types were verbal abuse and threats (32.0–100 %),12,13,15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,22,23 sexual harassment (10.3–84.6 %),12,15,19,22 and physical assault (3.0–51.0 %).12,13,15, 16, 17, 18, 19,22 The WPV risk factors identified by the highest proportions of studies' participants included intoxicated patients (100 %),15 staff stress (80.0 %), feeling of inadequacy resulting in self-protection (80.0 %),17 more vulnerable MRPs (less than 40 years old [77.3 %]20 and female [68.9 %]),23 working in radiation therapy treatment room (68.0 %),19 long patient waiting time (61.5 %),15 working in ED (56.5 %), examination room (54.1 %), and general radiography (46.8 %),22 less than 5-year work experience (46.4 %), night shift (43.6 %),20 working in public hospital (39.4 %),16 overcrowding environment (30.8 %),15 working in non-examination and waiting area (23.9 %),22 unable to meet patients'/family members' expectations (23.1 %),15 miscommunication (21.0 %),22 patient handling (14.0 %),18 inadequate staff (14.0 %),22 inadequate security measures (12.6 %),20 interaction with colleagues (12.0 %),18 and lone working (11.8 %).22 Although the major focus of all included studies was the WPV prevalence and/or risk factors, some reported the WPV impacts such as more irritable (65.0 %), difficult to concentrate (63.0 %),21 affecting patient care (57.3 %),23 more forgetful (46.1 %),21 anxiety and stress (26.4 %), work motivation reduction (25.2 %), lower energy level (21.0 %),22 and decrease of self-worth (24.5 %),21 and coping strategies, e.g., nothing (72.7 %),15 experience sharing with colleagues and family members (27.3 %),15 calming down perpetrators (19.1 %), seeking help from colleagues (13.6 %), self-defence (12.7 %), being angry (12.7 %), and legal action (9.1 %) as well.20 According to World Health Organization (WHO), workplace violence (WPV) is a significant issue in healthcare. WPV can be defined as healthcare workers being abused, assaulted or threatened in work-related events which include but are not limited to travelling to and from workplace, and implicit or explicit conflict affecting their health, safety or wellness.1 Common examples of WPV in healthcare include aggression, bullying, physical assault, sexual harassment, and verbal abuse and threats initiated by perpetrators such as patients, visitors and co-workers. Affected healthcare workers can experience from unnoticeable effects to fatality. Usually, these WPV incidents result in healthcare worker burnout, sleep disorder and stress, leading to reduction of their work performance as well as commitment and satisfaction. Hence, the WPV not only affects individual healthcare workers but also impacts on healthcare quality which in turn becomes academic, clinical, professional, ethical, societal, political and government concerns.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 As a result of its significance, a number of systematic reviews about the WPV in healthcare have been published.2, 3, 4, 5 According to an umbrella review of meta-analyses covering 674,266 healthcare workers published in 2022, overall WPV prevalence was 58.7 % and commonest incidents were verbal abuse and threats (66.8 %), physical assault (20.8 %) and sexual harassment (10.5 %), respectively.2 These findings are consistent with those of a previous systematic review and meta-analysis covering 331,544 healthcare workers published in 2019 (overall prevalence: 61.9 %, verbal abuse: 57.6 %, physical violence: 24.4 %, and sexual harassment: 12.4 %). However, it also highlighted that different countries and professions had variations of the WPV prevalence.3 Hence, there are some literature reviews focussed on specific countries or regions, e.g. Africa,6 Italy,7 South-East Asian and Western Pacific Regions,8 etc. and professions such as emergency medical services (EMS),9 nursing8 and pharmacy.10 To the best of our knowledge, no systematic review on WPV in medical radiation science (MRS) has been published yet. However, MRS is an indispensable part of modern healthcare.11 Medical radiation practitioners (MRPs) including diagnostic radiographers, nuclear medicine technologists (NMTs), medical sonographers and radiation therapists work in various clinical areas such as radiology, nuclear medicine, emergency and radiation oncology departments, intensive care units and operating theatres.12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 As per the previous systematic reviews in healthcare, various clinical settings would have different risk levels. Common high risk areas that are related to MRS practice include emergency department (ED), evening shift work, and waiting room.3, 4, 5 Although International Labour Office (ILO)/International Council of Nurses (ICN)/WHO/Public Services International (PSI) framework guidelines have provided suggested strategies to reduce the WPV in healthcare,1 without understanding of the WPV prevalence and risk factors in MRS, effective strategies for reducing the incidents of WPV in this profession could not be determined.2,3 Hence, it is timely to conduct a systematic review on the WPV in MRS. The purpose of this systematic review is to explore the published papers to answer the question “What was the prevalence of WPV in MRS and its risk factors?”

โจทย์ ปรนัย
What databases were used for the literature search in the systematic review on WPV in MRS?

Electronic scholarly publication databases, namely EBSCOhost/Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature Ultimate, PubMed/Medline, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Wiley Online Library were used for literature search to identify articles about WPV in MRS published over last 10 years as per preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines.

Electronic scholarly publication databases, namely EBSCOhost/Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature Ultimate, PubMed/Medline, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Wiley Online Library were used for literature search to identify articles about WPV in MRS published over last 10 years as per preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. To facilitate comparisons of the WPV prevalence and relative importance of individual risk factors across the included studies, their reported absolute figures of findings were used to synthesize respective percentages (if not stated).

โจทย์ อัตนัย
Essay | Workplace Violence (WPV) in Healthcare. Please explain the impacts and research gaps.

Impacts of Workplace Violence 1. Physical and Psychological Health Effects: Healthcare workers who experience WPV may suffer physical injuries ranging from minor to severe, 2. Workplace Morale and Productivity: WPV creates a stressful work environment characterized by fear, uncertainty, and decreased morale among staff.3. Quality of Patient Care: A disrupted work environment due to WPV can compromise patient safety and quality of care.4. Financial Costs: Healthcare institutions incur significant financial costs related to WPV, Research Gaps in Workplace Violence 1. Underreporting and Data Accuracy: There is a significant underreporting of WPV incidents due to factors such as fear of retaliation, normalization of violence, or lack of clear reporting mechanisms. 2. Risk Factors and Prevention Strategies: More research is needed to identify specific risk factors associated with WPV in different healthcare settings 3. Impact of Interventions: While various interventions and training programs have been implemented to mitigate WPV, their effectiveness remains unclear

addressing WPV in healthcare requires a multifaceted approach that includes robust research efforts to understand its impacts, identify effective prevention strategies, and support the well-being of healthcare workers. Closing the existing research gaps is essential for developing evidence-based policies and practices that promote a safe and supportive work environment for all healthcare professionals.