ArticleThe British journal of radiology2014
What we know and what we don't know about cancer risks associated with radiation doses from radiological imaging.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cumulative dose in pediatric CT "frequent flyers": cohort results and risk review.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- Lung ultrasound for the diagnosis of pulmonary consolidation in children with community-acquired pneumonia.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Low-Dose Radiation Induces Alterations in Fatty Acid and Tyrosine Metabolism in the Mouse Hippocampus: Insights from Integrated Multiomics.ACS chemical neuroscience · 2024Article
- An audit of patient radiation doses in interventional radiology at a South African hospital.SA journal of radiology · 2023Article
- Image Guidance in Spinal Surgery: A Critical Appraisal and Future Directions.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
- Radiation safety education and diagnostic imaging in pediatric patients with surgically treated hydrocephalus: the patient and family perspective.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2021Article
- Repeated Pelvic Radiographs in Infants, After Harness Treatment for Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip, Carry Very Low Radiation Risk.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2020Article
- Article
- A comparison of the delivery of inhaled drugs by jet nebulizer and vibrating mesh nebulizer using dual-source dual-energy computed tomography in rabbits: a preliminaryAnnals of translational medicine · 2020Article
- Spatial Distribution of Noise Reduction in Four Iterative Reconstruction Algorithms in CT-A Technical Evaluation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Patient-Specific Organ and Effective Dose Estimates in Adult Oncologic CT.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2020Article
- Recurrence of pseudomyxoma peritonei after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.BJS open · 2019Observational
- AutoFoci, an automated high-throughput foci detection approach for analyzing low-dose DNA double-strand break repair.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Magnetic resonance angiography for the primary diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: A review from the international workshop for pulmonary functional imaging.World journal of radiology · 2018Review
- Demand for CT scans increases during transition from paediatric to adult care: an observational study from 2009 to 2015.The British journal of radiology · 2018Observational
- Lung ultrasonography to diagnose community-acquired pneumonia in children.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2017Review
- Clinical and Functional Assays of Radiosensitivity and Radiation-Induced Second Cancer.Cancers · 2017Review
- A restatement of the natural science evidence base concerning the health effects of low-level ionizing radiation.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2017Review
- Radiation dose associated with CT-guided drain placement for pediatric patients.Pediatric radiology · 2017Article
- Response to Dr. Frush.Pediatric radiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Quantifying radiation-induced cancer risks associated with radiological examinations is not easy, which has resulted in much controversy. We can clarify the situation by distinguishing between higher dose examinations, such as CT, positron emission tomography-CT or fluoroscopically guided interventions, and lower dose "conventional" X-ray examinations. For higher dose examinations, the epidemiological data, from atomic bomb survivors exposed to low doses and from direct epidemiological studies of paediatric CT, are reasonably consistent, suggesting that we do have a reasonable quantitative understanding of the individual risks: in summary, very small but unlikely to be zero. For lower dose examinations, we have very little data, and the situation is much less certain, however, the collective dose from these lower dose examinations is comparatively unimportant from a public health perspective.
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.