ArticleScientific reports2025
Automated system for establishing standard radiation dose-response curves and dose estimation for the Korean population.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiation emergency medical countermeasures: Current formulary, identified gaps, and future approaches.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2025Review
- High-Throughput Automated Construction and Validation of Dicentric Chromosome and Micronucleus Biodosimetry Calibration Curves for Radiation Emergency Response.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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biological dosimetry is crucial for estimating the doses from biological samples and guiding medical interventions for accidental radiation exposure. This study aimed to derive rapid and precise dose estimates using a dicentric chromosome assay. To address the challenges of manual scoring of dicentric chromosomes, we upgraded an automatic system aimed at enhancing the precision of dicentric chromosome detection while reducing the need for human intervention. We collected blood from 30 individuals aged 20-67 years to create 30 dose-response curves aiming to investigate the differences in responses among individuals. To validate dose-estimate accuracy within a 95% confidence interval, blinded samples were categorized into three groups according to the radiation dose as follows: ≥2, ≤ 1, and 0.1 Gy. When scoring dicentric chromosomes without human review and constructing a dose-response curve, individual differences were observed. For doses ≤ 1 Gy, the standard root formula was effective; conversely, for doses ≥ 2 Gy, the regression deep neural network proved to be more ac-curate. Our developed program allowed for the rapid analysis of a large volume of dicentric chromosome images.
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.