ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2020
Justification and optimization of radiation exposures: a new framework to aggregate arbitrary detriments and benefits.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Childbirth as Fault Lines: Justifications in Physician-Patient Interactions About Postnatal Rehabilitation.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myriad radiation effects, including benefits and detriments, complicate justifying and optimizing radiation exposures. The purpose of this study was to develop a comprehensive conceptual framework and corresponding quantitative methods to aggregate the detriments and benefits of radiation exposures to individuals, groups, and populations. In this study, concepts from the ICRP for low dose were integrated with clinical techniques focused on high dose to develop a comprehensive figure of merit (FOM) that takes into account arbitrary host- and exposure-related factors, endpoints, and time points. The study built on existing methods with three new capabilities: application to individuals, groups, and populations; extension to arbitrary numbers and types of endpoints; and inclusion of limitation, where relevant. The FOM was applied to three illustrative exposure situations: emergency response, diagnostic imaging, and cancer radiotherapy, to evaluate its utility in diverse settings. The example application to radiation protection revealed the FOM's utility in optimizing the benefits and risks to a population while keeping individual exposures below applicable regulatory limits. Examples in diagnostic imaging and cancer radiotherapy demonstrated the FOM's utility for guiding population- and patient-specific decisions in medical applications. The major finding of this work is that it is possible to quantitatively combine the benefits and detriments of any radiation exposure situation involving an individual or population to perform cost-effectiveness analyses using the ICRP key principles of radiation protection. This FOM fills a chronic gap in the application of radiation-protection theory, i.e., limitations of generalized frameworks to algorithmically justify and optimize radiation exposures. This new framework potentially enhances objective optimization and justification, especially in complex exposure situations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32556631What 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.