ArticleHealth physics2016
Status of NCRP Scientific Committee 1-23 Commentary on Guidance on Radiation Dose Limits for the Lens of the Eye.
Article in Health physics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Organ-based estimation and minimization of clinician's X-ray dose.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2022Article
- Risk of radiation-induced lens opacities among surgeons and interventional medical staff.Radiological physics and technology · 2019Article
- NCRP Program Area Committee 1: Basic Criteria, Epidemiology, Radiobiology, and Risk.Health physics · 2018Article
- Biological basis of radiation protection needs rejuvenation.International journal of radiation biology · 2017Review
- Radiobiology in Cardiovascular Imaging.JACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2016Review
- NCRP Program Area Committee 1: Basic Criteria, Epidemiology, Radiobiology and Risk.Health physics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Previous National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) publications have addressed the issues of risk and dose limitation in radiation protection and included guidance on specific organs and the lens of the eye. NCRP decided to prepare an updated commentary intended to enhance the previous recommendations provided in earlier reports. The NCRP Scientific Committee 1-23 (SC 1-23) is charged with preparing a commentary that will evaluate recent studies on the radiation dose response for the development of cataracts and also consider the type and severity of the cataracts as well as the dose rate; provide guidance on whether existing dose limits to the lens of the eye should be changed in the United States; and suggest research needs regarding radiation effects on and dose limits to the lens of the eye. A status of the ongoing work of SC 1-23 was presented at the Annual Meeting, "Changing Regulations and Radiation Guidance: What Does the Future Hold?" The following represents a synopsis of a few main points in the current draft commentary. It is likely that several changes will be forthcoming as SC 1-23 responds to subject matter expert review and develops a final document, expected by mid 2016.
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.