ArticleRadiation protection dosimetry2024
Assessment of air dose distribution in the vertical plane for better occupational exposure management.
Article in Radiation protection dosimetry, 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.
- Evaluating the Educational Video Materials for Radiation Education on Nursing Students and Nurses: A Quasi-Experimental Research.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 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
Abstract
The International Commission on Radiological Protection recommended a significant reduction of the equivalent dose limit for the eye lens. Reportedly, medical staff in charge of diagnostic imaging procedures may exceed the new dose limits for the eye lens. The use of dosimeters dedicated to the eye lens remains low, and dosimeters for the neck region were often used to assess eye lens doses. However, measurements by neck badges may overestimate or underestimate the recommended eye lens doses because the height of the neck differs from that of the eye. This study aimed to evaluate the air dose distribution in the vertical plane to understand the difference between neck and eye doses. H*(10) in the height of the eye position was 52.8% lower than that in the height of the neck position in the under-table position. Thus, the equivalent eye lens dose evaluated using a neck badge dosimeter may be overestimated.
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.