ArticleHealth physics2017
ICNIRP Statement on Diagnostic Devices Using Non-ionizing Radiation: Existing Regulations and Potential Health Risks.
Article in Health physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancements in Image-Based Analyses for Morphology and Staging of Colon Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.BioMed research international · 2025Pooled it
- Identifying the knowledge structure of electromagnetic fields and health research: Text network analysis and topic modeling.PloS one · 2022Article
- Key Points in Remote-Controlled Drug Delivery: From the Carrier Design to Clinical Trials.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- The Chairside Periodontal Diagnostic Toolkit: Past, Present, and Future.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Non-Ionizing Radiation in Swedish Health Care-Exposure and Safety Aspects.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Discovering new 3D bioprinting applications: Analyzing the case of optical tissue phantoms.International journal of bioprinting · 2019Article
- Emerging medical applications based on non-ionizing electromagnetic fields from 0 Hz to 10 THz.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2019Article
- Occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields from medical sources.Industrial health · 2018Review
- Assessing Exposures to Magnetic Resonance Imaging's Complex Mixture of Magnetic Fields forFrontiers in public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Use of non-ionizing radiation (NIR) for diagnostic purposes allows non-invasive assessment of the structure and function of the human body and is widely employed in medical care. ICNIRP has published previous statements about the protection of patients during medical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), but diagnostic methods using other forms of NIR have not been considered. This statement reviews the range of diagnostic NIR devices currently used in clinical settings; documents the relevant regulations and policies covering patients and health care workers; reviews the evidence around potential health risks to patients and health care workers exposed to diagnostic NIR; and identifies situations of high NIR exposure from diagnostic devices in which patients or health care workers might not be adequately protected by current regulations. Diagnostic technologies were classified by the types of NIR that they employ. The aim was to describe the techniques in terms of general device categories which may encompass more specific devices or techniques with similar scientific principles. Relevant legally-binding regulations for protection of patients and workers and organizations responsible for those regulations were summarized. Review of the epidemiological evidence concerning health risks associated with exposure to diagnostic NIR highlighted a lack of data on potential risks to the fetus exposed to MRI during the first trimester, and on long-term health risks in workers exposed to MRI. Most of the relevant epidemiological evidence that is currently available relates to MRI or ultrasound. Exposure limits are needed for exposures from diagnostic technologies using optical radiation within the body. There is a lack of data regarding risk of congenital malformations following exposure to ultrasound in utero in the first trimester and also about the possible health effects of interactions between ultrasound and contrast media.
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.