Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19153756›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2009

How reliable are the risk estimates for X-ray examinations in forensic age estimations? A safety update.

F Ramsthaler, P Proschek, W Betz, M A Verhoff

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Age estimation for forensic purposes in Italy: ethical issues.International journal of legal medicine · 2014
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

F RamsthalerCenter of Forensic Medicine, Goethe-University of Frankfurt Main, Frankfurt Main, Germany. ramsthaler@em.uni-frankfurt.de
P Proschek
W Betz
M A Verhoff
Goethe University Frankfurt · DEUniversity of Giessen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Possible biological side effects of exposure to X-rays are stochastic effects such as carcinogenesis and genetic alterations. In recent years, a number of new studies have been published about the special cancer risk that children may suffer from diagnostic X-rays. Children and adolescents who constitute many of the probands in forensic age-estimation proceedings are considerably more sensitive to the carcinogenic risks of ionizing radiation than adults. Established doses for X-ray examinations in forensic age estimations vary from less than 0.1 microSv (left hand X-ray) up to more than 800 microSv (computed tomography). Computed tomography in children, as a relatively high-dose procedure, is of particular interest because the doses involved are near to the lower limit of the doses observed and analyzed in A-bombing survivor studies. From these studies, direct epidemiological data exist concerning the lifetime cancer risk. Since there is no medical indication for forensic age examinations, it should be stressed that only safe methods are generally acceptable. This paper reviews current knowledge on cancer risks associated with diagnostic radiation and aims to help forensic experts, dentists, and pediatricians evaluate the risk from radiation when using X-rays in age-estimation procedures.

Indexed as

Age Determination by SkeletonAge Determination by TeethAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansLikelihood FunctionsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedRadiation DosageRadiation Tolerance

Identifiers

PMID19153756
OpenAlexW2073968010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.