Subjective perception of radioactivity: No change post successful treatment with radioiodine;Strahlen bleiben böse keine änderung der subjektiven konzepte von radioaktivität nach erfolgreicher radioiodtherapie

NuklearMedizin

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 84-88

  Freudenberg, Lutz S ^a   Muller S P ^a   Beyer, T ^a   Bockisch, A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cultural anthropology; Medical anthropology; Perception; Radiation; Radioiodine therapy

Indexed keywords

RADIOACTIVE IODINE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MALE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT INFORMATION; PERCEPTION; RADIOACTIVITY; THYROID DISEASE; THYROID NODULE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE; FEMALE; HUMANS; IODINE RADIOISOTOPES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTION; THYROID DISEASES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 67049160369     PISSN: 00295566     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3413/nukmed-0209     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. D'haese S, Vinh-Hung V, Bijdekerke P et al. The effect of timing of the provision of information on anxiety and satisfaction of cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. J Cancer Educ 2000; 15: 223-227.
2. De Man S, Gemmel P, Vlerick P et al. Patients' and personnel's perceptions of service quality and patient satisfaction in nuclear medicine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002; 29: 1109-1117. (Pubitemid 34985353)
3. Dietlein M, Dederichs B, Kobe C et al. Therapy for non-toxic multinodular goiter: Radioiodine therapy as attractive alternative to surgery. Nuklearmedizin 2006; 45: 21-34. (Pubitemid 44070818)
4. Dietlein M, Dressler J, Grünwald F et al. Guideline for radioiodine therapy for benign thyroid diseases (version 4). Nuklearmedizin 2007; 46: 220-223. (Pubitemid 47612289)
5. Dietlein M, Wegscheider K, Vaupel R et al. Management of multinodular goiter in Germany (Papillon 2005): do the approaches of thyroid specialists and primary care practitioners differ? Nuklearmedizin 2007; 46: 65-75.
6. Erikson K. Toxic Reckoning: Business Faces a New Kind of Fear, Harv Bus Rev 1990; 1: 118-126.
7. Erikson K Radiation's lingering dread. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist 1991; 47: 34-39.
8. Finucane M, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson SM. . The affect heuristic in judgements of risks and benefits. Journal of behavioral decision making 2000; 13: 1-17.
9. Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S et al. How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Polit Sci 1978; 9: 127-152.
10. Freudenberg LS, Beyer T, Bockisch A. Improving perceptions of the quality of service in nuclear medicine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30: 472. (Pubitemid 36692878)
11. Freudenberg LS, Beyer T, Müller SP et al. Evil radioactivity. Subjective perception of radioactivity in patients with thyroid disease prior to treatment with radioiodine. Nuklearmedizin 2006; 45: 229-234.
12. Hall EJ. Scientific view of low-level radiation risks. Radiographics 1991; 11: 509-518.
13. Hauser-Schäublin B, Kalitzkus V, Petersen I, Schröder I. Der geteilte Leib. Die kulturelle Dimension von Organtransplantation und Reproduktionsmedizin. Frankfurt, New York: Campus 2001.
14. Hendee WR. Personal and public perceptions of radiation risks. Radiographics 1991; 11: 1109-1119.
15. Hogarth RM. Educating intuition. Chicago: University Press 2001.
16. Holland JC. Radiotherapy. In: Holland JC, Rowland JH (Hrsg). Handbook of Psychooncology. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1989; 134-145.
17. Lamszus K, Verres R, Hubener KH. Wie erleben die Patienten die Strahlentherapie? Strahlenther Onkol 1994; 170: 162-168.
18. Loewenstein G, Weber E, Hsee CK, Welch E. Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin 2001; 127: 267-286. (Pubitemid 33696171)
19. MacGregor DG, Slovic P, Morgan MG. Perception of risks from electromagnetic fields: a psychometric evaluation of a risk-communication approach. Risk Anal 1994; 14: 815-828. (Pubitemid 24362992)
20. McNeil BJ, Pauker SG, Sox HC Jr, Tversky A. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med 1982; 27: 1259-1262.
21. Schicha H, Schober O. Nuklearmedizin. Basiswissen und klinische Anwendung. Stuttgart, New York: Schattauer 2000.
22. Sherry I. Nuclear medicine: will I glow in the dark, nurse? Nursing Standard 2000; 14: 48-53.
23. Siegrist M, Keller C, Cousin ME. Implicit attitudes toward nuclear power and mobile phone base stations: support for the affect heuristic. Risk Anal 2006; 26: 1021-1029. (Pubitemid 44341864)
24. Sjöberg L. Risk perception: experts and the public. European Psychologist 1998; 3: 1-13. (Pubitemid 128085208)
25. Slovic P. Perception of risk from radiation. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 1996; 68: 165-180. (Pubitemid 27010944)
26. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Rating the risks. Environment 1979; 21: 14-20. (Pubitemid 10189804)
27. Smith K. Perception of risks associated with nuclear power. Energy Environment Monitor 1988; 4: 61-70.
28. Stanovich KE, West RF. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2000; 23: 645-726. (Pubitemid 32146729)
29. Stegie R, Stender KH, Gunther D. Röntgenstrahlen im Urteil der Bevölkerung. Eine Befragung von 181 Verwaltungsangestellten. Radiologe 1979; 19: 196-199.
30. Strathern M. Reproducing the Future: Anthropology, Kinship, and the New Reproductive Technologies. New York. Routledge 2002.
31. Weart SR. Nuclear Fear: A History of Images. Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1998.