ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2024
The scientific nature of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model used in the system of radiological protection.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sub-Zero: A Review of the Current Evidence and Evolving Technologies Enabling Zero‑Fluoroscopy Procedures.Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE · 2026Review
- Multi-omics characterization of radiation-induced cerebellar remodeling and tumorigenic transcriptional programs.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Investigating a relation between amyloid beta plaque burden and accumulated neurotoxicity caused by amyloid beta oligomers.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Dose-Dependent Dual Effects of Gradient Ionizing Radiation on Neurocognition.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Dose-related association between radiation exposure from computed tomography (CT) scans during trauma hospitalizations and subsequent risk of developing new-onset cancers.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Radiophobia Harm, Its Main Cause, and a Proposed Solution.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the first half of the 20th century, it was commonly assumed that radiation-induced health effects occur only when the dose exceeds a certain threshold. This idea was discarded for stochastic effects when more knowledge was gained about the mechanisms of radiation-induced cancer. Currently, a key tenet of the international system of radiological protection is the linear no-threshold (LNT) model where the risk of radiation-induced cancer is believed to be directly proportional to the dose received, even at dose levels where the effects cannot be proven directly. The validity of the LNT approach has been questioned on the basis of a claim that only conclusions that can be verified experimentally or epidemiologically are scientific and LNT should, thus, be discarded because the system of radiological protection must be based on solid science. The aim of this publication is to demonstrate that the LNT concept can be tested in principle and fulfils the criteria of a scientific hypothesis. The fact that the system of radiological protection is also based on ethics does not render it unscientific either. One of the fundamental ethical concepts underlying the LNT model is the precautionary principle. We explain why it is the best approach, based on science and ethics (as well as practical experience), in situations of prevailing uncertainty.
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.