ArticleScientific reports2022
A practical approach for continuous in situ characterization of radiation quality factors in space.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A competing risks machine learning study of neutron dose, fractionation, age, and sex effects on mortality in 21,000 mice.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Impact of Radiation Quality on Microdosimetry and Chromosome Aberrations for High-Energy (>250 MeV/n) IonsLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The space radiation environment is qualitatively different from Earth, and its radiation hazard is generally quantified relative to photons using quality factors that allow assessment of biologically-effective dose. Two approaches exist for estimating radiation quality factors in complex low/intermediate-dose radiation environments: one is a fluence-based risk cross-section approach, which requires very detailed in silico characterization of the radiation field and biological cross sections, and thus cannot realistically be used for in situ monitoring. By contrast, the microdosimetric approach, using measured (or calculated) distributions of microdosimetric energy deposition together with empirical biological weighting functions, is conceptually and practically simpler. To demonstrate feasibility of the microdosimetric approach, we estimated a biological weighting function for one specific endpoint, heavy-ion-induced tumorigenesis in APC
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.