Posted: December 3rd, 2022

ournal Article Critique: Injury, Disasters, and Hazards

Nursing
Title: Journal Article Critique: Injury, Disasters, and Hazards
Number of sources: 1
Paper instructions:
Article for Part 1: Metz-Flamant, C. Samson, E., Caer-Lorho, S., Acker, A. & Laurier, D. (2012). Leukemia risk associated with chronic external exposure to ionizing radiation in a French cohort of nuclear workers. Radiation Research. 178; 489-498.
Part 1: Evaluate the article and provide a scholarly critique of the content. Your response must include the following:
• Describe the public health significance of the study. Discuss whether the impact is local or global and what important public health gap might be filled by this article.
• Critique the methodology. Support your analysis of how effective this methodology was and what might have been done differently to be more effective.
• Interpret the results in your own words and explain whether you agree or disagree with the author’s interpretation.
• Appraise whether the findings are actionable and if so, describe at least one action.

Part 2: See article 2 part 2 (May be use for below write-up)
Locate another research study on this same topic. In your posting:
• Provide the full APA reference and compare and contrast the articles. Describe whether the findings support each other or are in contradiction.
• Explain whether your opinions about the topic have changed in any way as a result of reviewing the second article and your peers opinions. Explain your response.
—

Journal Article Critique: Injury, Disasters, and Hazards
Part 1
Metz-Flamant et al. (2012) carried out a study to examine Leukemia risk related to prolonged external exposure to ionizing radiation. Leukemia is a cancerous effect upon exposure to ionizing radiation. The study was carried out at French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) and Nuclear Fuel Company (AREVA NC after a 10-year investigation of the participants. The study had 36,769 employees with an average of 28 years. The study recorded 73 deaths among the participants. The study’s findings demonstrate the research had a weakness in investigating the shape as well as modifying factors of the dose-response correlation as a result of the few deaths. An additional study is thus necessary to examine the impact of exposure to low doses on radiation-induced leukemia. Further research should demonstrate the health and safety issues that should be observed to reduce the risks.
Global research for all combined nuclear workers is necessary for the context. The examination should comprise nuclear plants, healthcare facilities, and government agencies. One of the study’s objectives is to ensure that nuclear plants should improve their health and safety standards. For instance, one of the improvements is to enhance the quality of protection and reducing the emission of radiation that comes into contact with workers. It should call to action the need to take personal protection that workers should take to ensure no exposure by nuclear and industrial plants.
The public health significance of the study by Metz-Flamant et al. (2012) is that leukemia mortality increases with the exposure to high doses of ionizing radiation. The results of the study demonstrate that the risk of Leukemia increased by 8 percent per 10 mSv. The degree of exposure for myeloid leukemia was higher. The results of the investigation are similar to those working in nuclear plants. The study thus shows the risk nuclear workers face due to radiation exposure. It points out the need for nuclear plants to safeguard their workers’ health by reducing their radiation exposure. The research findings call for global and local actions to protect the welfare of nuclear workers.
The article has a global impact in various sectors, including health, nuclear energy, and government agencies. The global impact is to signify that workers across nuclear plants in the world are at risk of radiation-induced leukemia. It is the responsibility of the nuclear plants to realize the risks their workers are exposed to. The global impacts call upon organizations to set safety standards that will reduce or prevent the risk of radiation exposure. Another global impact is to encourage healthcare workers to observe the relationships between exposure to radiation and leukemia. The elaborate data is essential in making substantial policies that will address the risks in the future.
A study on assessing the risk of Leukemia due to exposure to the radiation fills a significant health gap. It provides insight into the health risk associated with external exposure to the risk. The research findings demonstrate that nuclear plants should make substantial changes in their work practices to reduce health risks. For instance, the radiation-monitored workers employed at the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) between 1950 and 1994 were not safeguarded from the health risks. The risks of radiation-induced leukemia thus increased by 8 percent. The health gap demonstrates that government agencies should take action to safeguard the health of workers.
The study utilized Poisson regression and Cox models. The methodologies were categorized using the Poisson regression while they were kept continuously using Cox models. The Poisson regression method effectively allows a direct comparison of the ERR/Sv with the previous studies and estimates the EAR/Sv, which is not compatible with Cox models. Passion regression is not effective where the conditional variance is more significant than the conditional mean. Thus, it is important to consider a methodology that will be effective when the condition means is less than condition variance.
The results of the study show that leukemia mortality increases with exposure to high doses of ionizing radiation. The results of the study demonstrate that the risk of Leukemia spiked by 8 percent per 10 mSv. I agree with the author’s interpretation that exposure to ionizing radiation can increase the risk of leukemia. The author suggests that further studies will provide a better analysis of the issue. It is thus important for various agencies to collaborate in fighting against the risks.
The results are actionable since they present a real problem that requires a response from the nuclear plants and healthcare agencies. One of the actions that nuclear plants and healthcare departments are further to investigate the impact of exposure to ionizing radiation. The action requires significant changes in nuclear plants to safeguard the health of the workers. The actions will reduce the number of deaths and health complications.
Part 2
The second article by Samson et al. (2011) studies the effect of external photon radiation on workers’ mortality in French populations. The study focused on two populations, including workers exposed to external and internal contamination of photon radiation. The 1968 to 1994 research demonstrates that the two populations recorded over 1,700 deaths. It demonstrates that exposure to photon radiation can significantly affect the health of individuals and lead to fatalities.
The article by Metz-Flamant et al. (2012) and Samson et al. (2011) have similarities since they demonstrate the adverse effects of exposure to harmful substances. For instance, Metz-Flamant et al. (2012) show that ionizing radiation causes leukemia, while Samson et al. (2011) demonstrate that external and internal photon radiation causes cancer mortality. The studies show that workers in various plants should take precautions to avoid the health risks associated with exposure to harmful substances.
One of the significant differences in the study is the models of carrying out the research. Metz-Flamant et al. (2012) had 36,769 workers, while Samson et al. (2011) utilized 29,204 workers. Another difference is that Metz-Flamant et al. (2012) focused on external exposure, while Samson et al. (2011) focused on internal and external exposure. The differences do not impact the study’s findings, but the results corroborate in showing that exposure to harmful substances can undermine the health of workers in nuclear plants. The studies are not in any contradiction since their results support one another and other past findings.
The opinion about has not changed after changing the second article. Initially, I knew that the workers in nuclear and other industrial plants are exposed to harmful substances that can undermine their health. Reading the second article provides emphasis that the exposure to ionizing radiation and photon radiation can cause deaths. The second article shows that internal and external exposure causes significant health effects. My opinion is that nuclear plants should take action in reducing the risks associated with exposure to harmful substances.

References
Metz-Flamant, C., Samson, E., Caer-Lorho, S., Acker, A., & Laurier, D. (2012). Leukemia risk associated with chronic external exposure to ionizing radiation in a French cohort of nuclear workers. Radiation Research, 178(5), 489-498. https://doi.org/10.1667/RR2822.1
Samson, E., Telle-Lamberton, M., Caër-Lorho, S., Bard, D., Giraud, J. M., Metz-Flamant, C., … & Hill, C. (2011). Cancer mortality among two different populations of French nuclear workers. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 84(6), 627-634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-011-0636-5

Order | Check Discount

Tags: and Hazards, Disasters, ournal Article Critique: Injury