Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32804275›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2020

Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications in computed tomography: a literature review.

Graciano Paulo, John Damilakis, Virginia Tsapaki, Alexander A Schegerer, Jacques Repussard, Werner Jaschke, Guy Frija, European Society of Radiology

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Clinical applications of portable CT scanners.The British journal of radiology · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Graciano PauloESTESC - Coimbra Health School, Medical Imaging and Radiotherapy Department, Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra, Rua 5 de Outubro, S. Martinho do Bispo, 3046-854, Coimbra, Portugal. graciano@estescoimbra.pt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6297-778X
John DamilakisSchool of Medicine, University of Crete, Iraklion, Crete, Greece.
Virginia TsapakiKonstantopoulio General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Alexander A SchegererDepartment of Medical and Occupational Radiation Protection, Federal Office for Radiation Protection, Neuherberg, Germany.
Jacques RepussardInternational Consultant, St Nom la Bretèche, France.
Werner JaschkeDepartment of Radiology, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Guy FrijaParis Descartes University, Paris, France.
European Society of Radiology

Funding

European Commission ENER/2017/NUCL/SI2.759174
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn August 2017, the European Commission awarded the "European Study on Clinical Diagnostic Reference levels for X-ray Medical Imaging" project to the European Society of Radiology, to provide up-to-date Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications. The aim of this work was to conduct an extensive literature review by analysing the most recent studies published and the data provided by the National Competent Authorities, to understand the current situation regarding Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications for computed tomography.

resultsThe literature review has identified 23 papers with Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications for computed tomography from 15 countries; 12 of them from Europe. A total of 28 clinical indications for 6 anatomical areas (head, cervical spine/neck, chest, abdomen, abdomen-pelvis, chest-abdomen-pelvis) have been identified.

conclusionsIn all the six anatomical areas for which Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications were found, a huge variation of computed tomography dose descriptor values was identified, providing evidence for a need to develop strategies to standardise and optimise computed tomography protocols.

Indexed as

Clinical indicationsComputed tomographyComputed tomography dose descriptorsDiagnostic Reference Levels

Identifiers

PMID32804275
PMCPMC7431477

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.