ArticleDer Radiologe2012
[Current strategies for dosage reduction in computed tomography].
Article in Der Radiologe, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Computed tomography in multiple trauma patients: technical aspects, work flow, and dose reduction].Der Radiologe · 2014Article
- Use of low-dose contrast agent in cerebral angiography produces high-quality diagnostic images.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2014Article
- [Registration and monitoring of radiation exposure from radiological imaging].Der Radiologe · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The potential risks of radiation exposure associated with computed tomography (CT) imaging are reason for ongoing concern for both medical staff and patients. Radiation dose reduction is, according to the as low as reasonably achievable principle, an important issue in clinical routine, research and development. The complex interaction of preparation, examination and post-processing provides a high potential for optimization on the one hand but on the other a high risk for errors. The radiologist is responsible for the quality of the CT examination which requires specialized and up-to-date knowledge. Most of the techniques for radiation dose reduction are independent of the system and manufacturer. The basic principle should be radiation dose optimization without loss of diagnostic image quality rather than just reduction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22914872What 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.