ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2018
Re-evaluation of pediatric
Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inter-institutional variability in kidney dosimetry duringRadiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Comparative post-therapeutic dosimetry between 2D planar-based and hybrid-based methods for personalized Lu-177 treatment.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2024Article
- Image quality and lesion detectability in low-dose pediatricEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Article
- Investigating Low-Dose Image Quality in Whole-Body PediatricJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2021Article
- Patient-adapted organ absorbed dose and effective dose estimates in pediatric 18F-FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography studies.BMC medical imaging · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Because of the concerns associated with radiation exposure at a young age, there is an increased interest in pediatric absorbed dose estimates for imaging agents. Almost all reported pediatric absorbed dose estimates, however, have been determined using adult pharmacokinetic data with radionuclide S values that take into account the anatomical differences between adults and children based upon the older Cristy-Eckerman (C-E) stylized phantoms. In this work, we use pediatric model-derived pharmacokinetics to compare absorbed dose and effective dose estimates for
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.