ReviewPediatric radiology2011
Getting it right: are regulation and registries for CT radiation dose in children the answer?
Review in Pediatric radiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Falling prey to the sunk cost bias: a potential harm of patient radiation dose histories.Radiology · 2012Article
- Reply to commentary--'CT radiation dose reduction: can we do harm by doing good?'.Pediatric radiology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, the state of California enacted a law requiring radiologists to record the radiation dose that each patient receives for a CT scan. Failure to do so is penalized by law. This law becomes effective in July 2012. By July 2013, every facility that performs CT scans must become accredited by one of three professional groups. This report discusses the role that legislation is playing in the practice of medicine in regard to CT practice. Inherent in this discussion is the assumption that pediatric radiologists know the right dose that a child should receive for a specific clinical indication. But do we really know the answer to this? Compared to the European radiology community, the United States radiology community lags in this regard. This paper defines diagnostic reference levels (DRL) and reviews the history of DRL in the United States compared to that in the European community and the progress by the American College of Radiology's National Radiology Data Registry (NRDR) to establish national registries. The establishment of the first pediatric Quality Improvement Registry in CT Scans in Children (QuIRCC) and its progress to date will be discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21847740What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.