ReviewCureus2025
Advancing Exposure Index in Radiology for Optimized Imaging, Accuracy, and Future Innovations.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exposure index (EI) is a critical parameter in digital radiography, providing a quantitative measure of the radiation dose received by the detector. This review examines the significance of EI, methods for its determination, influencing factors, and clinical implications. Additionally, it explores challenges in standardization efforts and the role of emerging technologies, particularly artificial intelligence (AI), in optimizing exposure management. A comprehensive review of literature published over the last two decades was conducted using databases such as PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar. Studies addressing EI measurement, clinical applications, and advancements in exposure monitoring technology were analyzed. Guidelines from the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), and the European Federation of Organizations for Medical Physics (EFOMP) were also reviewed to assess standardization efforts and best practices. Findings highlight the importance of EI in radiation dose optimization and quality control. Despite standardization initiatives, variations persist across manufacturers and imaging systems due to factors such as patient characteristics, beam energy, detector sensitivity, and post-processing algorithms. Artificial intelligence-driven exposure monitoring systems have shown promise in enhancing EI accuracy and enabling real-time dose adjustments. Artificial intelligence technologies have the potential to revolutionize EI utilization by enabling automated exposure optimization, real-time monitoring, and predictive analytics. Future efforts should focus on refining AI algorithms, ensuring cross-platform standardization, and enhancing radiographer training to fully integrate AI into EI-based radiation safety protocols.
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.