Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Aug;63(3):307-322.
doi: 10.1007/s00411-024-01084-1. Epub 2024 Jul 17.

Quantitative stakeholder-driven assessment of radiation protection issues via a PIANOFORTE online survey

Veronika Groma  1 , Balázs Madas  2 , Florian Rauser  3 , Mandy Birschwilks  3 , Andreas Blume  3 , Almudena Real  4 , Rein Murakas  5   6   7 , Boguslaw Michalik  8 , Isabel Paiva  9 , Tone-Mette Sjømoen  10 , Alan H Tkaczyk  11 , Jelena Mrdakovic Popic  10
Affiliations

Quantitative stakeholder-driven assessment of radiation protection issues via a PIANOFORTE online survey

Veronika Groma et al. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2024 Aug.

Abstract

To enhance stakeholder engagement and foster the inclusion of interests of citizens in radiation protection research, a comprehensive online survey was developed within the framework of the European Partnership PIANOFORTE. This survey was performed in 2022 and presented an opportunity for a wide range of stakeholders to voice their opinions on research priorities in radiation protection for the foreseeable future. Simultaneously, it delved into pertinent issues surrounding general radiation protection. The PIANOFORTE e-survey was conducted in the English language, accommodating a diverse range of participants. Overall, 440 respondents provided their insights and feedback, representing a broad geographical reach encompassing 29 European countries, as well as Canada, China, Colombia, India, and the United States. To assess the outcomes, the Positive Matrix Factorization numerical model was applied, in addition to qualitative and quantitative assessment of individual responses, enabling the discernment of four distinct stakeholder groups with varying attitudes. While the questionnaire may not fully represent all stakeholders due to the limited respondent pool, it is noteworthy that approximately 70% of the participants were newcomers to comparable surveys, demonstrating a proactive attitude, a strong willingness to collaborate and the necessity to continuously engage with stakeholder groups. Among the individual respondents, distinct opinions emerged particularly regarding health effects of radiation exposure, medical use of radiation, radiation protection of workers and the public, as well as emergency and recovery preparedness and response. In cluster analysis, none of the identified groups had clear preferences concerning the prioritization of future radiation protection research topics.

Keywords: E-survey; Positive Matrix factorization (PMF); Radiation protection; Risk perception; Stakeholder engagement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Countries of respondents worldwide and distribution of the respondents across the European countries
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Statistics of respondents’ satisfaction ratings with the available national information on different RP issues
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Statistics of respondents’ opinion about the level of implementation of measures required by the EU Basic Safety Standard Directive 2013/59 (EU BSS) for specific RP issues
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bochicchio F, Fenton D, Fonseca H, García-Talavera M, Jaunet P, Long S, Olsen B, Mrdakovic Popic J, Ringer W (2022) National Radon Action Plans in Europe and need of effectiveness indicators: an overview of HERCA activities. Int J Environ Res Public Health 30(7):4114. 10.3390/ijerph1907411410.3390/ijerph19074114 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown SG, Eberly S, Paatero P, Norris GA (2015) Methods for estimating uncertainty in PMF solutions: examples with ambient air and water quality data and guidance on reporting PMF results. Sci Total Environ 518–519:626–635. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.02210.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.022 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Burns WJ, Slovic P (2012) Risk perception and behaviors: anticipating and responding to crises. Risk Anal 32:579–582. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01791.x 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01791.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cagno S, Lind OC, Popic JM, Skipperud L, De Nolf W et al (2020) Micro-analytical characterization of thorium-rich aggregates from Norwegian NORM sites (Fen Complex, Telemark). Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 219:106273. 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2020.106273 PMID: 32339145 - PubMed
    1. Chu M, Plemmons R (2005) Nonnegative matrix factorization and applications. Bull Int Linear Algebra Soc 34:26

LinkOut - more resources