ArticleScientific reports2020
Quantification of DNA Double Strand Breaks and Oxidation Response in Children and Adults Undergoing Dental CBCT Scan.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Assessment of Genotoxicity and Cytotoxicity of Cone Beam Computed Tomography Exposure: A Systematic Review.Acta medica Philippina · 2026Article
- Principles of radiological protection and application of ALARA, ALADA, and ALADAIP: a critical review.Brazilian oral research · 2025Review
- Optimizing cone-beam computed tomography exposure for an effective radiation dose and image quality balance.Imaging science in dentistry · 2024Article
- Creation of Dimicleft radiological cleft phantom skulls using reversed virtual planning technique.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2023Article
- The usefulness of cone beam computed tomography according to age in cleft lip and palate.Journal of medicine and life · 2022Article
- An analysis of patient dose received during cone-beam computed tomography in relation to scan settings and imaging indications as seen in a dental institution in order to establish institutional diagnostic reference levels.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2022Article
- Radiobiological risks following dentomaxillofacial imaging: should we be concerned?Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2021Review
- Paediatric dentist's ability to detect and diagnose dental trauma using 2D versus 3D imaging.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2021Article
- New insights in gene expression alteration as effect of doxorubicin drug resistance in triple negative breast cancer cells.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Assessing the possible biological effects of exposure to low doses of ionizing radiation (IR) is one of the prime challenges in radiation protection, especially in medical imaging. Today, radiobiological data on cone beam CT (CBCT) related biological effects are scarce. In children and adults, the induction of DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) in buccal mucosa cells and 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-oxo-dG) and antioxidant capacity in saliva samples after CBCT examination were examined. No DNA DSBs induction was observed in children nor adults. In children only, an increase in 8-oxo-dG levels was observed 30 minutes after CBCT. At the same time an increase in antioxidant capacity was observed in children, whereas a decrease was observed in adults. Our data indicate that children and adults react differently to IR doses associated with CBCT. Fully understanding these differences could lead to an optimal use of CBCT in different age categories as well as improved radiation protection guidelines.
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.