ArticleRadiological physics and technology2024
Data analysis of average glandular dose in mammography toward revision of the diagnostic reference level of Japan.
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.
- Comprehensive image quality comparison of conventional and new flat panel detectors under bedside chest radiography beam conditions.Radiological physics and technology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnostic reference level (DRL) for mammography for 2015 and 2020 has been published by J-RIME. More new dose studies are needed to revise the next DRL. In preparation for the next revision of the DRL for mammography, this study investigated data from the Japan Central Organization on Quality Assurance of Breast Cancer Screening on the mean average glandular dose (AGD) for institutional image accreditation in 2019-2023 and the relationship between the average at eligible institutions to date and the type of breast X-ray system. The 95th percentile values of the AGD distributions for the Computed Radiography (CR) and Flat Panel Detector (FPD) systems were 2.5 mGy and 2.0 mGy, respectively. Moreover, it is assumed that AGD is decreasing due to the spread of FPD systems, and it is expected that the further spread of FPD systems and systems with W/Rh target/filter will reduce AGD in future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38904916What 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.