ESTIMATION OF HP(3) AMONG STAFF MEMBERS IN TWO NUCLEAR MEDICINE UNITS IN FINLAND.

C Lindholm, A Pekkarinen, O Sipilä, A-L Manninen, M Lehtinen, T Siiskonen

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Radiation protection dosimetry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

C LindholmSTUK-Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, POB 14, Helsinki 00811, Finland.

A PekkarinenSTUK-Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, POB 14, Helsinki 00811, Finland.

O SipiläHUS Medical Imaging Center, Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

A-L ManninenOYS Department of Nuclear Medicine and Radiology, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.

M LehtinenSTUK-Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, POB 14, Helsinki 00811, Finland.

T SiiskonenSTUK-Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, POB 14, Helsinki 00811, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The eye lens exposure among 16 technicians in two nuclear medicine departments at university hospitals in Finland was investigated by measuring the operational quantity Hp(3) using EYE-D dosemeters. For all workers, the annual mean Hp(3) was estimated to be 1.1 mSv (max. 3.9 mSv). The relation between Hp(3) to routinely monitored personal dose equivalent Hp(10) was clearly correlated. Considering individual dose measurement periods (2-4 weeks), the Hp(3)/Hp(10) ratio was 0.7 (Pearson's coefficient r = 0.90, p < 0.001, variation of ratio 0.1-2.3). The variation decreased considerably with increasing Hp(10) (σ2 = 0.04 vs. 0.43 for Hp(10) > 0.1 mSv vs. < 0.1 mSv, respectively), i.e. higher Hp(10) predicts Hp(3) more reliably. Moreover, annual Hp(10) data from national dose register during 2009-2018 were used to derive the annual Hp(3) applying the Hp(3)/Hp(10) ratio. The data from Finnish nuclear medicine departments imply that routine measurements of Hp(3) among nuclear medicine technicians are not justified.

Indexed as

Lens, CrystallineNuclear MedicineOccupational ExposureFinlandHumansRadiation Dosage

Identifiers

PMID32662509

DOI10.1093/rpd/ncaa096

PMCPMC7455372

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.