Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25304714›Full record

ArticlePediatric radiology2014

The communication of the radiation risk from CT in relation to its clinical benefit in the era of personalized medicine: part 1: the radiation risk from CT.

Sjirk J Westra

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric radiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Sjirk J WestraDivision of Pediatric Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 34 Fruit St., White 246A, Boston, MA, 02114, USA, swestra@partners.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The theory of radiation carcinogenesis has been debated for decades. Most estimates of the radiation risks from CT have been based on extrapolations from the lifespan follow-up study of atomic bomb survivors and on follow-up studies after therapeutic radiation, using the linear no-threshold theory. Based on this, many population-based projections of induction of future cancers by CT have been published that should not be used to estimate the risk to an individual because of their large margin of error. This has changed recently with the publication of three large international cohort follow-up studies, which link observed cancers to CT scans received in childhood. A fourth ongoing multi-country study in Europe is expected to have enough statistical power to address the limitations of the prior studies. The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) report released in 2013 specifically addresses variability in response of the pediatric population exposed to ionizing radiation. Most authorities now conclude that there is enough evidence to link future cancers to the radiation exposure from a single CT scan in childhood but that cancer risk estimates for individuals must be based on the specifics of exposure, age at exposure and absorbed dose to certain tissues. Generalizations are not appropriate, and the communication of the CT risk to individuals should be conducted within the framework of personalized medicine.

Indexed as

Informed ConsentPatient Education as TopicChildEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansInternationalityMaleNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedPrecision MedicinePrevalenceRisk AssessmentTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.