Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35604875›Full record

ArticleRadiation research2022

Reliability of Questionnaire-Based Dose Reconstruction: Human Factor Uncertainties in the Radiation Dosimetry of Chernobyl Cleanup Workers.

Vladimir Drozdovitch, Konstantin Chizhov, Vadim Chumak, Elena Bakhanova, Nataliya Trotsyuk, Petro Bondarenko, Ivan Golovanov, Victor Kryuchkov

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Vladimir DrozdovitchDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS, Bethesda, Maryland.
Konstantin ChizhovDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS, Bethesda, Maryland.
Vadim ChumakNational Research Centre for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Elena BakhanovaNational Research Centre for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Nataliya TrotsyukNational Research Centre for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Petro BondarenkoChernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, Ukraine.
Ivan GolovanovState Research Center - Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
Victor KryuchkovState Research Center - Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency, Moscow, Russia.
National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine · UAChornobyl Center · UADivision of Cancer Epidemiology and GeneticsFederal Medical-Biological Agency · RUState Scientific Center of the Russian Federation - Federal Medical Biophysical Center named after A.I. Burnazyan · RUUnited States Department of Health and Human Services · US

Funding

Studies of Populations Exposed to Occupational Sources of RadiationZIACP010133 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI KITAHARA, CARI · 2009 to 2025
$34.2M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999NCI NIH HHS HHSN261200900017C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This original study aims to quantify the human factor uncertainties in radiation doses for Chernobyl cleanup workers that are associated with errors in direct or proxy personal interviews due to poor memory recall a long time after exposure. Two types of doses due to external irradiation during cleanup mission were calculated independently. First, a "reference" dose, that was calculated using the historical description of cleanup activities reported by 47 cleanup workers shortly after the completion of the cleanup mission. Second, a "current" dose that was calculated using information reported by 47 cleanup workers and respective 24 proxies (colleagues) nominated by cleanup workers during a personal interview conducted more recently, as part of this study, i.e., 25-30 years after their cleanup missions. The Jaccard similarity coefficient for reference and current doses was moderate: the arithmetic mean ± standard deviation was 0.29 ± 0.18 (median = 0.31) and 0.23 ± 0.18 (median = 0.22) for the cleanup worker's and proxy's interviews, respectively. The agreement between two doses was better if the cleanup worker was interviewed rather than his proxy: the median ratio of current to reference dose was 1.0 and 0.56 for cleanup workers and proxies, respectively. The present study has shown that human factor uncertainties lead to underestimation or overestimation of the "true" reference dose for most cleanup workers up to 3 times. In turn, the potential impact of these errors on radiation-related risk estimates should be assessed.

Indexed as

Chernobyl Nuclear AccidentOccupational ExposureRadioactive Hazard ReleaseHumansRadiation DosageRadiometryReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35604875
PMCPMC9384793
OpenAlexW4281383788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.