ArticleIndoor air2022
Short- versus long-term tests of indoor radon for risk assessment by Monte-Carlo method towards effective measurement strategy.
Article in Indoor air, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Climate change and environmental radioactivity: a review of studies on climate conditions in variation on indoor radon concentrations.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2025Review
- Short-Term vs. Long-Term: A Critical Review of Indoor Radon Measurement Techniques.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Radon Exposure Assessment in Occupational and Environmental Settings: An Overview of Instruments and Methods.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Metrology for Indoor Radon Measurements and Requirements for Different Types of Devices.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Radon exposure risks among residents proximal to gold mine tailings in Gauteng Province, South Africa: a cross-sectional preliminary study protocol.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Short- versus long-term tests of indoor radon for risk assessment by Monte-Carlo method towards effective measurement strategy.Indoor air · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There now exists a broad consensus among the European radon community members that long-term measurements are the best practice in managing the risk of indoor radon exposure. This, not with standing the fact that <1% of buildings have been tested in Europe so far. At the same time, US' experience over the years shows more effective regulation has been accomplished through tests that are short-term. This study quantifies the uncertainty of collective risks obtained independently through short- and long-term measurements under the same conditions using the Monte Carlo method that takes into account the number of measurements, as well as the diversity of the spatial distribution of radon concentrations in representative samples of buildings. Simulation results have shown that contrary to the erroneous practice of the European radon community, the accuracy of the assessment of the collective risk due to radon exposure does not in fact depend on the duration of the indoor test at all. The main problem remains ensuring the existance of a representative sample of buildings, especially given limited number of tests. In this regard, recommended is a revision of the regulatory documents of IAEA, ICRP, WHO, and ISO focusing on (i) the principle of the effective measurement strategy based on rational ISO/IEC concepts, (ii) the mass measurements via short-term tests, and (iii) the societal engagement in measurements.
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.