Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36567703›Full record

ArticleRadiation physics and chemistry (Oxford, England : 1993)2023

Is it necessary to define new diagnostic reference levels during pandemics like the Covid19-?

Banafsheh Zeinali-Rafsanjani, Azamalsadat Alavi, Mehrzad Lotfi, Sara Haseli, Mahdi Saeedi-Moghadam, Moein Moradpour

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation physics and chemistry (Oxford, England : 1993), 2023. 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
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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. Evaluating the Cavitary Lung Lesions on CT Scan of COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Study.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2024
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Banafsheh Zeinali-RafsanjaniMedical Imaging Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Azamalsadat AlaviChronic Respiratory Disease Research Center, National Research Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases (NRITLD), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mehrzad LotfiMedical Imaging Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Sara HaseliChronic Respiratory Disease Research Center, National Research Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases (NRITLD), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mahdi Saeedi-MoghadamMedical Imaging Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Moein MoradpourRadiology Department of Taleghani Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Shiraz University of Medical Sciences · IRMasih Daneshvari Hospital · IRShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This study intended to assess the dose length product (DLP), effective cumulative radiation dose (E.D.), and additional cancer risk (ACR) due to a chest CT scan to detect or follow up the Covid-19 disease in four university-affiliated hospitals that used different imaging protocols. Indeed, this study aimed to examine the differences in decision-making between different imaging centers in choosing chest CT imaging protocols during the pandemic, and to assess whether a new diagnostic reference level (DRL) is needed in pandemic situations. Methods: This retrospective study assessed the E.D. of all chest imagings for Covid-19 for six months in four different hospitals in our country. Imaging parameters and DLP (mGy.cm) were recorded. The E.D.s and ACRs from chest CT scans were calculated using an online calculator. Results: Thousand-six hundred patients were included in the study. The mean cumulative dose due to chest CT was 3.97 mSv which might cause 2.59 × 10 Conclusions: The variety of mean E.D.s shows that different hospitals used different imaging protocols. Since there is no defined DRL in the pandemic, some centers use routine protocols, and others try to reduce the dose but insufficiently.In pandemics such as Covid-19, when CT scan is used for screening or follow-up, DLPs can be significantly lower than in normal situations. Therefore, international regularized organizations such as the international atomic energy agency (IAEA) or the international commission on radiological protection (IRCP) should provide new DRL ranges.

Indexed as

Additional cancer riskChest CT scanCumulative effective doseDiagnostic reference level

Identifiers

PMID36567703
PMCPMC9764089
OpenAlexW4311993541

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.