Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32548042›Full record

ReviewIranian journal of public health2020

The Efficacy of Periodic Complete Blood Count Tests in Evaluation of the Health Status of Radiation Workers in Iran: A Systematic Review.

Asma Zare, Seyed Mohammad Javad Mortazavi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Iranian journal of public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 52% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Asma ZareDepartment of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Seyed Mohammad Javad MortazaviDepartment of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Shiraz University of Medical Sciences · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeriodic medical examinations of radiation workers are routinely conducted in many countries. Although low dose radiation (LDR) is not expected to cause a significant effect on blood count, the periodic examination usually includes reviewing the work history, general medical history, a physical examination and collecting a blood sample. Despite lymphocytes are the most sensitive cells to radiation, their counts do not show any significant change as long as the radiation level is less than a few hundreds of millisievert (mSv). In spite of this, in Iran, radiation workers, even those who work in diagnostic radiology departments, are regularly examined for blood count changes.

methodsAfter a detailed search in PubMed, ISI, Scopus, SID and Google Scholar, only 12 out of 650 articles matched our criteria. A review of these 12 reports was conducted. The full texts were fully reviewed by the authors.

resultsThe complete blood count (CBC) test has a very low efficacy in evaluation of the adverse health effects of ionizing radiation in radiation workers. Therefore, finding alternative methods with a higher efficacy is recommended.

conclusionCBC tests cannot be introduced as valid markers of potential radiation effects in most occupational exposures. Given this consideration, in periodic tests of radiation workers, cytogenetic tests can be the gold-standard method. In particular, due to its relatively low cost and good sensitivity and specificity, the dicentric assay can be promising. Moreover, the simple and rapid evaluation of micronuclei by fast automated scoring systems can be a good alternative for current low efficacy CBC tests.

Indexed as

Complete blood count (CBC)Radiation workersRiskSafety

Identifiers

PMID32548042
PMCPMC7283191
OpenAlexW3015433172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.