Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31792583›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2020

Multinational data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent radiological procedures: call for action.

Marco Brambilla, Jenia Vassileva, Agnieszka Kuchcinska, Madan M Rehani

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 126 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Marco BrambillaMedical Physics Department, University Hospital "Maggiore della Carità", C.so Mazzini 18, 28100, Novara, Italy. marco.brambilla@maggioreosp.novara.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7338-3960
Jenia VassilevaRadiation Protection of Patients Unit, Radiation Safety and Monitoring Section, NSRW, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna International Centre, PO Box 100, 1400, Vienna, Austria.
Agnieszka KuchcinskaMedical Physics Department, Maria Skłodowska Curie Memorial Cancer Centre and Institute of Oncology, Roentgena 5, 02-781, Warsaw, Poland.
Madan M RehaniMassachusetts General Hospital, 175 Cambridge Street, Suite 244, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
International Atomic Energy Agency · ATMassachusetts General Hospital · USThe Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology · PLUniversità degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro” · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo have a global picture of the recurrent use of CT imaging to a level where cumulative effective dose (CED) to individual patients may be exceeding 100 mSv at which organ doses typically are in a range at which radiation effects are of concern

methodsThe IAEA convened a meeting in 2019 with participants from 26 countries, representatives of various organizations, and experts in radiology, medical physics, radiation biology, and epidemiology. Participants were asked to collect data prior to the meeting on cumulative radiation doses to assess the magnitude of patients above a defined level of CED.

resultsIt was observed that the number of patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv is much larger than previously known or anticipated. Studies were presented in the meeting with data from about 3.2 million patients who underwent imaging procedures over periods of between 1 and 5 years in different hospitals. It is probable that an additional 0.9 million patients reach the CED ≥ 100 mSv every year globally.

conclusionsThere is a need for urgent actions by all stakeholders to address the issue of high cumulative radiation doses to patients. The actions include development of appropriateness criteria/referral guidelines by professional societies for patients who require recurrent imaging studies, development of CT machines with lower radiation dose than today by manufacturers, and development of policies by risk management organizations to enhance patient radiation safety. Alert values for cumulative radiation exposures of patients should be set up and introduced in dose monitoring systems. KEY POINTS: • Recurrent radiological imaging procedures leading to high radiation dose to patients are more common than ever before. • Tracking of radiation exposure of individual patients provides useful information on cumulative radiation dose. • There is a need for urgent actions by all stakeholders to address the issue of high cumulative radiation doses to patients.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiation DosageRadiation ExposureRadiographyRisk FactorsPatient safetyRadiation dosageRadiation protectionRadiologic TechnologyRisk

Identifiers

PMID31792583
OpenAlexW2991459700

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.