ArticleEuropean radiology2017
Benchmarking pediatric cranial CT protocols using a dose tracking software system: a multicenter study.
Article in European radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Innovative advances in pediatric radiology: computed tomography reconstruction techniques, photon-counting detector computed tomography, and beyond.Pediatric radiology · 2024Review
- Dual-Layer Detector Head CT to Maintain Image Quality While Reducing the Radiation Dose in Pediatric Patients.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2023Article
- Dose monitoring in pediatric and young adult head and cervical spine CT studies at two emergency duty departments.Emergency radiology · 2018Article
- Working Face-to-Face for Pediatric CT Dose Reduction: A Community Toolkit.Diagnostic imaging Europe · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo benchmark regional standard practice for paediatric cranial CT-procedures in terms of radiation dose and acquisition parameters.
methodsPaediatric cranial CT-data were retrospectively collected during a 1-year period, in 3 different hospitals of the same country. A dose tracking system was used to automatically gather information. Dose (CTDI and DLP), scan length, amount of retakes and demographic data were stratified by age and clinical indication; appropriate use of child-specific protocols was assessed.
resultsIn total, 296 paediatric cranial CT-procedures were collected. Although the median dose of each hospital was below national and international diagnostic reference level (DRL) for all age categories, statistically significant (p-value < 0.001) dose differences among hospitals were observed. The hospital with lowest dose levels showed smallest dose variability and used age-stratified protocols for standardizing paediatric head exams. Erroneous selection of adult protocols for children still occurred, mostly in the oldest age-group.
conclusionEven though all hospitals complied with national and international DRLs, dose tracking and benchmarking showed that further dose optimization and standardization is possible by using age-stratified protocols for paediatric cranial CT. Moreover, having a dose tracking system revealed that adult protocols are still applied for paediatric CT, a practice that must be avoided. KEY POINTS: • Significant differences were observed in the delivered dose between age-groups and hospitals. • Using age-adapted scanning protocols gives a nearly linear dose increase. • Sharing dose-data can be a trigger for hospitals to reduce dose levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27260340What 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.