ArticleJournal of biomedical physics & engineering2023
Evaluating the Necessity and Radiation Risk of Brain CT Scans Requested by the Trauma Emergency Department.
Article in Journal of biomedical physics & engineering, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance of computed tomography and magnetic resonance morphometry in evaluating brain atrophy in Down syndrome.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Performance of A Statistical-Based Automatic Contrast-to-Noise Ratio Measurement on Images of the ACR CT Phantom.Journal of imaging · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Numerous Computed Tomography (CT) scan requests for trauma patients have raised serious concern about the impacts of radiation such as radiation-induced cancers. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the necessity rate of requested head CT scans for traumatic patients and to ultimately estimate the risk of radiation-induced brain cancer. Material and Methods: In this retrospective analytical study, traumatic patients, who had undergone a head CT scan in a two-month period from August 23 to October 22, 2018, were considered as the study population. Two radiologists reviewed each patient individually to evaluate the rate of normal and abnormal cases. Dose length product in milligrays (mGy) was utilized to calculate the effective dose (ED) in millisieverts (mSv), resulting in an assessment of the risk of radiation-induced brain cancer using ICRP 103. Results: Among 523 scans, 460 patients (88%) received normal reviews, while only 47 patients (9%) had findings related to their current trauma. The mean effective dose value was 1.05±0.36 mSv. Risk of the radiation induced brain cancer was calculated to be 0.037 and 0.030 new cancer cases in 10000 males and females per Gy, respectively. Conclusion: Final results demonstrated that a significant number of traumatic patients undergoing a CT scan are in fact, healthy. Such reckless usage of CT and consequently the excess exposure could result in a dramatic rise in cancer rates. The need to limit unnecessary CT scan usage and keeping the radiation given to patients as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) when collecting essential diagnostic data is more critical than ever.
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.