Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30972532›Full record

ArticleLa Radiologia medica2019

Medical radiological procedures: which information would be chosen for the report?

Samantha Cornacchia, Rosangela Errico, Rosario Francesco Balzano, Vincenzo Fusco, Arcangela Maldera, Elena Pierpaoli, Cristina Ferrari, Giuseppe Rubini, Giuseppe Guglielmi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in La Radiologia medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Samantha CornacchiaASL BT, Medical Physics, Barletta, Italy.
Rosangela ErricoASL BT, Medical Physics, Barletta, Italy.
Rosario Francesco BalzanoRadiology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5630-6760
Vincenzo FuscoRadiation Oncology, IRCCS-CROB, Rionero in Vulture, Potenza, Italy.
Arcangela MalderaASL BT, Medical Physics, Barletta, Italy.
Elena PierpaoliMedical Physics, ASUR Marche AV 5, Ascoli Piceno, Italy.
Cristina FerrariNuclear Medicine Unit, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy.
Giuseppe RubiniNuclear Medicine Unit, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy.
Giuseppe GuglielmiRadiology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy. giuseppe.guglielmi@unifg.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4325-8330

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS AND

objectivesThe aim of this study was to properly define the information regarding patient exposure to Ionizing Radiations in the radiological report, according to the European Directive 2013/59/EURATOM (EU 2013/59 art.58(b)). For this purpose, we evaluated the results from other Member States EU 2013/59 transpositions and from Guidelines recommendation published by International Organizations involved in diagnostic radiology. A practical way for implementing art.58 is also traced. MATERIALS AND

methodsDosimetric quantities, such as exposure, absorbed dose and effective dose which may be included in radiological report, were first analyzed; then, in order to define international state of art of Member States EU 2013/59 transposition, a Web research using French, English, Spanish and German key words was performed.

resultsEU 2013/59 transposition for 5 Member States was reported. Especially regarding art.58, a European project reports that few European countries (11 of 28) have identified the dose metrics to be used in radiological report. Scientific organizations supporting clinical radiologists and medical physicists have published Guidelines reporting parameters useful to quantify the radiation output and to assess patient dose.

conclusionsOur research revealed that there is not a shared interpretation of patient exposure information to be included in radiological report. Nevertheless, according to scientific community, authors believe that the exposure is the most appropriate information that could be included in radiological report. Alternatively, but with more expensiveness, a risk index based on effective dose could be used. Moreover, the systematic exposure information recorded could be useful for dose estimates of population from medical exposure.

Indexed as

Radiation DosageAdultAge FactorsChildEuropean UnionHumansMedical RecordsPatient Education as TopicRadiation ExposureRadiation, IonizingRadiologyRadiometryReference ValuesRelative Biological EffectivenessRisk ManagementDose indexEU Directive 2013/59 transpositionPatient exposure informationRadiological equipmentRadiological report

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.