ArticleDose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society2011
Assessing potential radiological harm to fukushima recovery workers.
Article in Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A radiological emergency exists at the Fukushima Daiichi (Fukushima I) nuclear power plant in Japan as a result of the March 11, 2011 magnitude 9.0 earthquake and the massive tsunami that arrived later. News media misinformation related to the emergency triggered enormous social fear worldwide of the radioactivity that is being released from damaged fuel rods. The heroic recovery workers are a major concern because they are being exposed to mostly gamma radiation during their work shifts and life-threatening damage to the radiosensitive bone marrow could occur over time. This paper presents a way in which the bone marrow equivalent dose (in millisieverts), as estimated per work shift, could be used along with the hazard function model previously developed for radiological risk assessment to repeatedly check for potential life-threatening harm (hematopoietic system damage) to workers. Three categories of radiation hazard indication are proposed: 1, life-threatening damage unlikely; 2, life-threatening damage possible; 3, life-threatening damage likely. Categories 2 and 3 would be avoided if the whole body effective dose did not exceed the annual effective dose limit of 250 mSv. For down-wind populations, hormetic effects (activated natural protective processes) are much more likely than are deleterious effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.