ReviewJournal of radiation research2016
Neutron relative biological effectiveness in Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb survivors: a critical review.
Review in Journal of radiation research, 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of a High-Throughput Dicentric Chromosome Assay Using Complex Radiation Exposures.Radiation research · 2023Article
- Small Molecule Responses to Sequential Irradiation with Neutrons and Photons for Biodosimetry Applications: An Initial Assessment.Radiation research · 2021Article
- Neutron Radiobiology and Dosimetry.Radiation research · 2021Article
- Radioprotection and Radiomitigation: From the Bench to Clinical Practice.Biomedicines · 2020Review
- Human Transcriptomic Response to Mixed Neutron-Photon Exposures Relevant to an Improvised Nuclear Device.Radiation research · 2019Article
- Serum lipidomic analysis from mixed neutron/X-ray radiation fields reveals a hyperlipidemic and pro-inflammatory phenotype.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The calculated risk of cancer in humans due to radiation exposure is based primarily on long-term follow-up studies, e.g. the life-span study (LSS) on atomic bomb (A-bomb) survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Since A-bomb radiation consists of a mixture of γ-rays and neutrons, it is essential that the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of neutrons is adequately evaluated if a study is to serve as a reference for cancer risk. However, the relatively small neutron component hampered the direct estimation of RBE in LSS data. To circumvent this problem, several strategies have been attempted, including dose-independent constant RBE, dose-dependent variable RBE, and dependence on the degrees of dominance of intermingled γ-rays. By surveying the available literature, we tested the chromosomal RBE of neutrons as the biological endpoint for its equivalence to the microdosimetric quantities obtained using a tissue-equivalent proportional counter (TEPC) in various neutron fields. The radiation weighting factor, or quality factor, Q
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.