ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2021
A case study of cost-benefit analysis in occupational radiological protection within the healthcare system of Sweden.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of a patient fixation device on healthcare worker radiation doses in fluoroscopy-assisted endoscopy.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2025Article
- Strategic Objectives of Nanotechnology-Driven Repurposing in Radiopharmacy-Implications for Radiopharmaceutical Repurposing (Beyond Oncology).Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- A case study of cost-benefit analysis in occupational radiological protection within the healthcare system of Sweden.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to demonstrate cases of cost-benefit analysis within healthcare, of how economic factors can be considered in occupational radiological protection, in agreement with the as low as reasonably achievable principle and present Swedish legislations. In the first part of the present study, a comparison of examples within health economics used by authorities and institutes in Sweden was made. The comparison focused on value of a statistical life, quality-adjusted life year, and monetary cost assigned to a unit of collective dose for radiation protection purposes (α-value). By this comparison, an α-value was determined as an interval between $45 and $450 per man-mSv, for the Swedish society in 2021. The α-value interval can be interpreted as following: Less than $45 per man-mSv is a good investment. From $45 to $450 per man-mSv, other factors than costs and collective dose are important to consider. More than $450 per man-mSv is too expensive. In the second part of the present study, seven cases of cost-benefit analyses in occupational radiological protection were provided. The present study focused specifically on cases where the relevant factors were costs and collective dose. The present case study shows a large variation in costs per collective dose from different types of occupational radiological protection, used at Skaraborg Hospital in Sweden.
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.