ArticleRadiological physics and technology2024
Assessment of dosimetric approaches in evaluating radiation exposure for interventional cardiologists in Sri Lanka.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low-dose radiation exposure and health outcomes among healthcare workers: a multi-center prospective cohort study.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Interventional cardiologists face significant radiation exposure during interventional cardiology procedures. Therefore, this study focuses on assessing radiation exposure among interventional cardiologists during their procedures. Specifically, it aims to determine the effectiveness of both single and double dosimeter methods in estimating annual occupational radiation doses. This research holds pioneering significance as it represents the very first study undertaken in Sri Lanka. Thirteen interventional cardiologists performed 486 interventional cardiology procedures over three months in three different healthcare institutes. Active Hp(10) dosimeters were placed to measure radiation exposure. Effective doses were calculated using single and double dosimetric algorithms. Annual occupational doses were assessed on an operator basis. Statistical analyses were conducted to assess algorithmic differences and dose variations using the Kruskal-Wallis test and linear regression. The highest annual occupational dose for each dosimetric algorithm received as 2.00 ± 0.24 mSv, 2.29 ± 0.48 mSv, 3.35 ± 0.71 mSv, and 2.64 ± 0.42 mSv, respectively, and remained below the recommended safety limit of 20 mSv/year. The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed no significant differences in the effective doses among double dosimetric algorithms, as well as between single and double dosimetric algorithms (p > 0.05). Linear regression showed strong correlations among various algorithms, demonstrating consistency. The findings of this study hold significant effects on interventional cardiology practice in Sri Lanka, enhancing radiation safety and monitoring.
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.