ReviewDento maxillo facial radiology2021
Radiobiological risks following dentomaxillofacial imaging: should we be concerned?
Review in Dento maxillo facial radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genotoxic and Cytotoxic Effects of Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Multidetector Computed Tomography on Exfoliated Buccal Epithelial Cells.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2023Article
- Creation of Dimicleft radiological cleft phantom skulls using reversed virtual planning technique.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2023Article
- Feasibility of photon-counting computed tomography as a novel imaging modality for challenging endodontic diagnostic tasks.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Monitoring cone-beam CT radiation dose levels in a University Hospital.Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2023Article
- Genotoxicity and cytotoxicity effects of x-rays on the oral mucosa epithelium at different fields of view: A cone beam computed tomography technique.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2023Article
- Low-Dose Gamma Radiation Modulates Liver and Testis Tissues Response to Acute Whole Body Irradiation.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis review aimed to present studies that prospectively investigated biological effects in patients following diagnostic dentomaxillofacial radiology (DMFR).
methodsLiterature was systematically searched to retrieve all studies assessing radiobiological effects of using X-ray imaging in the dentomaxillofacial area, with reference to radiobiological outcomes for other imaging modalities and fields.
resultsThere is a lot of variability in the reported radiobiological assessment methods and radiation dose measures, making comparisons of radiobiological studies challenging. Most radiological DMFR studies are focusing on genotoxicity and cytotoxicity, data for 2D dentomaxillofacial radiographs, albeit with some methodological weakness biasing the results. For CBCT, available evidence is limited and few studies include comparative data on both adults and children.
conclusionsIn the future, one will have to strive towards patient-specific measures by considering age, gender and other individual radiation sensitivity-related factors. Ultimately, future radioprotection strategies should build further on the concept of personalized medicine, with patient-specific optimization of the imaging protocol, based on radiobiological variables.
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.