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.
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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Size-specific dose estimation in pediatric computed tomography: From dose characterization to individualized optimization.World journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Article
- Reconstruction and Validation of Arterial Geometries for Computational Fluid Dynamics Using Multiple Temporal Frames of 4D Flow-MRI Magnitude Images.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2023Article
- Complete written/oral information about dose exposure in CT: is it really useful to guarantee the patients' awareness about radiation risks?La Radiologia medica · 2018Article
- Radiation dose management for pediatric cardiac computed tomography: a report from the Image Gently 'Have-A-Heart' campaign.Pediatric radiology · 2018Review
- Radiation dose associated with CT-guided drain placement for pediatric patients.Pediatric radiology · 2017Article
- Management of the Pediatric Neurocritical Care Patient.Seminars in neurology · 2016Review
- The incidental pulmonary nodule in a child. Part 2: Commentary and suggestions for clinical management, risk communication and prevention.Pediatric radiology · 2015Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
25304714What 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.