ArticlePloS one2016
Construction of Taiwanese Adult Reference Phantoms for Internal Dose Evaluation.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the internal dose evaluation, the specific absorbed fraction (SAF) and S-value are calculated from the reference phantom based on Caucasian data. The differences in height and weight between Caucasian and Asian may lead to inaccurate dose estimation. In this study, we developed the Taiwanese reference phantoms. 40 volunteers were recruited. Magnetic resonance images (MRI) were obtained, and the contours of 15 organs were drawn. The Taiwanese reference man (TRM) and Taiwanese reference woman (TRW) were constructed. For the SAF calculation, the differences in the self-absorption SAF (self-SAF) between the TRM, TRW, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) adult phantom were less than 10% when the difference in organ mass was less than 20%. The average SAF from liver to pancreas of TRM was 38% larger than that of the ORNL adult phantom, and the result of TRW was 2.02 times higher than that of the ORNL adult phantom. For the S-value calculation, the ratios of TRW and ORNL adult phantom ranged from 0.91 to 1.57, and the ratios of TRM and ORNL adult phantom ranged from 1.04 to 2.29. The SAF and S-value results were dominantly affected by the height, weight, organ mass, and geometric relationship between organs. By using the TRM and TRW, the accuracy of internal dose evaluation can be increased for radiation protection and nuclear medicine.
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.