ArticleRadiation protection dosimetry2021
IONIZING RADIATION EXPOSURE IN PATIENTS WITH COVID-19: MORE THAN NEEDED.
Article in Radiation protection dosimetry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lifetime Attributable Risk for Breast Cancer Induced by High-Resolution Computed Tomography During COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of family & reproductive health · 2024Article
- Redefining Radiation Metrics: Evaluating Actual Doses in Computed Tomography Scans.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- COVID-19 and vaccination impact on radiology departments provided by Dose Archiving and Communication System.European radiology · 2023Article
- Did radiation exposure increase with chest computed tomography use among different ages during the COVID-19 pandemic? A multi-center study with 42028 chest computed tomography scansDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2023Article
- Radiation Exposure and Lifetime Attributable Risk of Cancer Incidence and Mortality from Low- and Standard-Dose CT Chest: Implications for COVID-19 Pneumonia Subjects.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of the study was to evaluate the ionizing radiation exposure in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective study in which all patients presented with suggestive symptoms of COVID-19 were included. The study was carried out in a university-affiliated private hospital in Istanbul, Turkey. Biological radiation dose exposure (cumulative effective dose: CED) was evaluated in millisievert (mSv) units.
resultsA total of 1410 patients were included in the study. Of all study subjects, 804 patients (57%) underwent only one chest computed tomography (CT) procedure. Six hundred and six patients (43%) had two or more chest CT procedures. Median CED was 6.02 (min-max:1.67-16.27) mSv. The number of patients who were exposed to ≤ 5 mSv were 149 (24.6%), whereas 457 patients (75.4%) were exposed to >5 mSv.
conclusionThe radiation exposure in COVID-19 patients seems unjustifiably high. Awareness should be increased as to the proper use of chest CT in COVID-19 as per to the society recommendations.
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.