ArticleBMC health services research2023
Evaluation of micronuclei and antioxidant status in hospital radiation workers occupationally exposed to low-dose ionizing radiation.
Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigation of cellular senescence in the mouse liver caused by low dose fractionated X-ray therapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- The impact of long-term low-dose ionizing radiation on human health: risks and protective measures.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Study on the factors influencing lens opacity among medical radiation workers exposed to long-term low-dose ionizing radiation.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere is scientific evidence that ionizing radiation (IR) can be responsible for various health hazards that are one of the concerns in occupational exposure. This study was performed to evaluate DNA damage and antioxidant status in hospital workers who are occupationally exposed to low doses of IR. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this study, twenty occupationally exposed to low doses of IR (CT and angiography) comprising with control groups which matched them. In order to investigate the effects of chronic irradiation of radiation workers, Micronuclei (MN) frequency and the antioxidant activity of Superoxide Dismutase (SOD), Catalase (CAT) and Total Antioxidant Capacity (TAC) were measured. Then, to check adaptation against high challenge dose, the samples (in all groups) were irradiated in vitro and MN frequency was compared. Finally, to investigated the effect of the high dose after the acute and chronic low dose of ionizing radiation, MN frequency was compared in two groups (the control group that was to in-vitro irradiated (acute low dose + high dose) and radiation workers (chronic low dose + high dose)).
resultsMN frequency in the occupationally exposed group (n = 30) increased significantly when compared to the control group (p-value < 0.0001). However, chronic irradiation of radiation workers could not lead to an adaptive Sresponse, while acute low-doses could produce this effect (p-value ˂ 0.05). In addition, the activity levels of antioxidant enzymes SOD, CAT, and TAC were not statistically different between the radiation workers and the control group (p-value > 0.05).
conclusionsWe observed that exposure to low doses of IR leads to increased cytogenetic damage, could not cause an adaptive-response, and improve antioxidant capacity in radiation workers. Controlling healthcare workers' exposure is the first step to improving the health of hospital workers and the quality of patient care, thus decreasing human and economic costs.
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.