Cross-sectional survey examines patient preferences on radiologist gender and enhances training for improved interactions.
Objective: This study explores gender dynamics in diagnostic imaging by identifying factors influencing patients’ refusal of imaging by opposite-gender radiologists and examining radiologists’ preparedness in managing such interactions. The goal is to propose targeted training strategies that enhance gender-sensitive, culturally competent radiology practices. Method: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 120 radiology residents in public and private hospitals of Rawalpindi and Islamabad, Pakistan. A structured, paper-based questionnaire was used, comprising two sections: Section A assessed patient-related factors influencing refusal of imaging by opposite-gender radiologists; Section B explored radiologists’ experiences, confidence, and preferences for gender-sensitive training. Results: Among patients, personal modesty (28.3%), religious beliefs (26.7%), and family influence (24.2%) were the primary reasons for refusing imaging by opposite-gender radiologists. Female patients most frequently cited modesty, while male patients emphasized religion and family. Radiologists reported varied comfort and preparedness in cross-gender interactions. Female radiologists showed significantly greater preparedness (p=.029) but encountered more perceived patient discomfort (p=.008). Preferred training areas included gender-sensitive communication (36.2%) and ethical/legal considerations (31.5%). Conclusion: Gender-related factors significantly influence patient decisions and radiologist preparedness in diagnostic imaging, especially in culturally conservative settings. Female radiologists appear more prepared but face distinct challenges. Incorporating structured training in gender-sensitive communication, cultural competence, and ethics can improve patient satisfaction and radiologist confidence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Riaz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: