Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Australian Institute of Radiography The Radiographer, 2006, 53 (2): 3 We invite your comments on articles in The Radiographer In recent Editorial comments I have made general calls for radiographers and radiation therapists to put pen to paper and write an article for The Radiographer or to become a reviewer and provide feedback on articles that have been submitted. There has been an increase in both of these areas and I thank those people for their efforts. Journals, especially scientific health journals such as The Radiographer, are meant to provide two-way communication. No article that is written and reviewed is perfect. All articles are open to challenge. An article on recent research or to change clinical practice must challenge current thinking and / or practice. As such, as the editor, I have found that The Radiographer is currently lacking that two-way communication. In the year and half in this role, no one has written to me to challenge, debate or even agree with an article that has been submitted. Does this mean that all the recent authors of articles are 100% correct in their thoughts? Should we, as professional radiographers and radiation therapists, not only maintain our current practice through reading relevant journal articles but also discuss and debate issues with our colleagues? Should not this then be put to print so we can share this debate to a broader range of our colleagues? I put the challenge to the readers of The Radiographer, write and let all of your radiography and radiation therapy colleagues know your thought on articles in this journal or on any other professional issue that may be of interest to us. Enjoy this issue and happy and informative reading. Rob Davidson Editor in Chief Submissions invited for The Radiographer Now in its 53rd year, The Radiographer continues to be the peak regional publication for radiography and associated disciplines. The Editorial Review Board continues to seek quality submissions from practitioners and academics that will ensure The Radiographer's reputation as a learning resource and a means of career enhancement for accepted authors. If you have an interesting case study, have been involved in clinical trials or studies pertaining to the discipline, or would simply like to comment on some of the content that you might have read in The Radiographer via correspondence, please send your work to the editor for consideration for publication. All work will be submitted to the Editorial Review Board for peer review and authors will be notified promptly of their work's acceptance or rejection. Interested authors should refer to the abridged 'Instructions to authors' on page 39 of this issue for the style and manner in which submissions should be presented. Work to be considered for publication should be sent to: The Editor in Chief The Radiographer Australian Institute of Radiography PO Box 1169 Collingwood Vic 3066 Australia © 2006 Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy. Reproduced with permission by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences – Wiley
Published: Aug 1, 2006
You can share this free article with as many people as you like with the url below! We hope you enjoy this feature!
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.