ReviewThe British journal of radiology2021
Radiation concerns in frequent flyer patients: should imaging history influence decisions about recurrent imaging?
Review in The British journal of radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cumulative dose in pediatric CT "frequent flyers": cohort results and risk review.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- The cumulative radiation dose paradigm in pediatric imaging.The British journal of radiology · 2021Review
- Contemporary issues in radiation protection in medical imaging: introductory editorial.The British journal of radiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiation risks from diagnostic imaging have captured the attention of patients and medical practitioners alike, yet it remains unclear how these considerations can best be incorporated into clinical decision-making. This manuscript presents a framework to consider these issues in a potentially at-risk population, the so called "frequent flyer" patients undergoing a large amount of recurrent imaging over time. Radiation risks from the low-dose exposures of diagnostic imaging are briefly reviewed, as applied to recurrent exposures. Some scenarios are then explored in which it may be helpful to incorporate knowledge of a patient's imaging history. There is no simple or uniformly applicable approach to these challenging and often nuanced clinical decisions. The complexity and variability of the underlying disease states and trajectories argues against alerting mechanisms based on a simple cumulative dose threshold. Awareness of imaging history may instead be beneficial in encouraging physicians and patients to take the long view, and to identify those populations of frequent flyers that might benefit from alternative imaging strategies.
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.