ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2022
Comparison of organ and effective dose estimations from different Monte Carlo simulation-based software methods in infant CT and comparison with direct phantom measurements.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inter-software variability in CT organ-dose calculation under identical scan conditions: implications for users and dose evaluation in the Japanese population.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Dose-reduction strategies in whole-body CT for injured patients in the emergency department: a scoping review.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluation of ultra-low and low-dose CT skeletal survey for fracture detection in assessments for suspected non-accidental injury: a prospective post-mortem study.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Quantifying and Contextualizing Radiation Doses in Common Pediatric Medical Imaging Examinations.Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice · 2025Article
- Evaluation of direct point dose estimation based on the distribution of the size-specific dose estimate.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Article
- Incidence and Mortality Life-Attributable Risks for Patients Subjected to Recurrent CT Examinations and Cumulative Effective Dose Exceeding 100 mSv.Clinics and practice · 2024Article
- Cumulative radiation dose from medical imaging in paediatric congenital heart disease patients with epicardial cardiac implantable electronic devices.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2024Article
- Comparison of organ and effective dose estimations from different Monte Carlo simulation-based software methods in infant CT and comparison with direct phantom measurements.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeComputational dosimetry software is routinely used to evaluate the organ and effective doses from computed tomography (CT) examinations. Studies have shown a significant variation in dose estimates between software in adult cohorts, and few studies have evaluated software for pediatric dose estimates. This study aims to compare the primary organ and effective doses estimated by four commercially available CT dosimetry software to thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) measurements in a 1-year-old phantom.
methodsOne hundred fifteen calibrated LiF (Mg, Cu, P)-TLD 100-H chips were embedded within an anthropomorphic phantom representing a 1-year-old child at positions that matched the approximate location of organs within an infant. The phantom was scanned under three protocols, each with whole-body coverage. The mean absorbed doses from 25 radiosensitive organs and skeletal tissues were determined from the TLD readings. Effective doses for each of the protocols were subsequently calculated using ICRP 103 formalism. Dose estimates by the four Monte Carlo-based dose calculation systems were determined and compared to the directly measured doses.
resultsMost organ doses determined by computation dosimetry software aligned to phantom measurements within 20%. Additionally, comparisons between effective doses are calculated using computational and direct measurement methods aligned within 20% across the three protocols. Significant variances were found in bone surface dose estimations among dosimetry methods, likely caused by differences in bone tissue modeling.
conclusionAll four-dosimetry software evaluated in this study provide adequate primary organ and effective dose estimations. Users should be aware, however, of the possible estimated uncertainty associated with each of the programs.
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.