ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2014
A Bayesian hierarchical method to account for random effects in cytogenetic dosimetry based on calibration curves.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2014. 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The dicentric chromosome assay (DCA) is one of the most sensitive and reliable methods of inferring doses of radiation exposure in patients. In DCA, one calibration curve is prepared in advance by in vitro irradiation to blood samples from one or sometimes multiple healthy donors in considering possible inter-individual variability. Although the standard method has been demonstrated to be quite accurate for actual dose estimates, it cannot account for random effects, which come from such as the blood donor used to prepare the calibration curve, the radiation-exposed patient, and the examiners. To date, it is unknown how these random effects impact on the standard method of dose estimation. We propose a novel Bayesian hierarchical method that incorporates random effects into the dose estimation. To demonstrate dose estimation by the proposed method and to assess the impact of inter-individual variability in samples from multiple donors on the estimation, peripheral blood samples from 13 occupationally non-exposed, non-smoking, healthy individuals were collected and irradiated with gamma rays. The results clearly showed significant inter-individual variability and the standard method using a sample from a single donor gave anti-conservative confidence interval of the irradiated dose. In contrast, the Bayesian credible interval for irradiated dose calculated by the proposed method using samples from multiple donors properly covered the actual doses. Although the classical confidence interval of calibration curve with accounting inter-individual variability in samples from multiple donors was roughly coincident with the Bayesian credible interval, the proposed method has better reasoning and potential for extensions.
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.