Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38206532›Full record

ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2024

Comparing fetal phantoms with surrogate organs in female phantoms during CT exposure of pregnant patients.

Mohamed Khaldoun Badawy, Kashish Kashish, Shay Payne, Maeve Masterson

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Mohamed Khaldoun BadawyMonash Health Imaging, Monash Health, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia. mohamed.badawy@monashhealth.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8029-9951
Kashish KashishSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Shay PayneMonash Health Imaging, Monash Health, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia.
Maeve MastersonMonash Health Imaging, Monash Health, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the rising use of Computed Tomography (CT) in diagnostic radiology, there are concerns regarding radiation exposure to sensitive groups, including pregnant patients. Accurately determining the radiation dose to the fetus during CT scans is essential to balance diagnostic efficacy with patient safety. This study assessed the accuracy of using the female uterus as a surrogate for fetal radiation dose during CT imaging. The study used common CT protocols to encompass various scenarios, including primary beam, scatter, and partial exposure. The computational program NCICT was used to calculate radiation doses for an adult female and a fetus phantom. The study highlighted that using the uterus for dose estimation can result in consistent underestimations of the effective dose, particularly when the fetus lies within the primary radiation beam. These discrepancies may influence clinical decisions, affecting care strategies and perceptions of associated risks. In conclusion, while the female uterus can indicate fetal radiation dose if the fetus is outside the primary beam, it is unreliable when the fetus is within the primary beam. More reliable abdomen/pelvic organs were recommended.

Indexed as

FetusPhantoms, ImagingRadiation DosageTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultFemaleHumansPregnancyRadiation ExposureUterusComputed tomographyDosimetryPhantomsPregnancyRadiation safety

Identifiers

PMID38206532
PMCPMC11166780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.