ArticleEuropean radiology2019
Local clinical diagnostic reference levels for chest and abdomen CT examinations in adults as a function of body mass index and clinical indication: a prospective multicenter study.
Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- First nationwide clinical indication-based diagnostic reference levels incorporating size-specific dose estimates for adult chest CT in Morocco.Emergency radiology · 2026Article
- AI-Driven Prediction of Chest CT Radiation Doses: Establishing BMI-Based Diagnostic Reference Levels and Patient-Factor Correlations for Machine-Learning Models.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Radiation Dose of Abdominal and Lung Computed Tomography Based on Body Mass Index as an Indicator.The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS · 2025Article
- Validation of a multi-parameter algorithm for personalized contrast injection protocol in liver CT.European radiology experimental · 2024Article
- Establishment of local diagnostic reference levels for computed tomography with cloud-based automated dose-tracking software in TürkiyeDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2024Article
- Optimizing CT Abdomen-Pelvis Scan Radiation Dose: Examining the Role of Body Metrics (Waist Circumference, Hip Circumference, Abdominal Fat, and Body Mass Index) in Dose Efficiency.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2024Article
- Clinical diagnostic reference levels and image quality metrics for CT in oncology patients.SA journal of radiology · 2024Article
- How to establish and use local diagnostic reference levels: an ESR EuroSafe Imaging expert statement.Insights into imaging · 2023Article
- Oncology-specific radiation dose and image noise reference levels in adult abdominal-pelvic CT.Clinical imaging · 2023Article
- Article
- Assessment of task-based image quality for abdominal CT protocols linked with national diagnostic reference levels.European radiology · 2022Article
- Implementation of a computed tomography dose management program across a multinational healthcare organization.European radiology · 2021Article
- Prospective multicenter study on personalized and optimized MDCT contrast protocols: results on liver enhancement.European radiology · 2021Article
- Recent updates in radioprotection.European radiology · 2021Article
- Computed tomography radiation doses for common computed tomography examinations: a nationwide dose survey in United Arab Emirates.Insights into imaging · 2020Article
- Update of national diagnostic reference levels for adult CT in Switzerland and assessment of radiation dose reduction since 2010.European radiology · 2020Article
- Long-term experience and analysis of data on diagnostic reference levels: the good, the bad, and the ugly.European radiology · 2020Article
- Towards establishment of diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indication in the state of Qatar.European journal of radiology open · 2020Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Chest Computed Tomography Optimization: A Task-based Framework for Balancing Detectability and Radiation Dose.Journal of medical physicsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare institutional dose levels based on clinical indication and BMI class to anatomy-based national DRLs (NDRLs) in chest and abdomen CT examinations and to assess local clinical diagnostic reference levels (LCDRLs).
methodsFrom February 2017 to June 2018, after protocol optimization according to clinical indication and body mass index (BMI) class (< 25; ≥ 25), 5310 abdomen and 1058 chest CT series were collected from 5 CT scanners in a Swiss multicenter group. Clinical indication-based institutional dose levels were compared to the Swiss anatomy-based NDRLs. Statistical significance was assessed (p < 0.05). LCDRLs were calculated as the third quartile of the median dose values for each CT scanner.
resultsFor chest examinations, dose metrics based on clinical indication were always below P75 NDRL for CTDI
conclusionThe results suggest the necessity of estimating clinical indication-based DRLs, especially for abdomen examinations. Stratifying per BMI class allows further optimization of the CT doses. KEY POINTS: • Our data show that clinical indication-based DRLs might be more appropriate than anatomy-based DRLs and might help in reducing large variations in dose levels for the same type of examinations. • Stratifying the data per patient-size subgroups (non-overweight, overweight) allows a better optimization of CT doses and therefore the possibility to set LCDRLs based on BMI class. • Institutions who are fostering continuous dose optimization and LDRLs should consider defining protocols based on clinical indication and BMI group, to achieve ALARA.
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.