ArticleJournal of radiation research2025
Evaluation of radiation protection by lead glasses for interventional radiology physicians wearing prescription glasses: considering dose reduction by prescription glasses excluding lead.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2025. 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.
- Transition from a detector-dose-based to a CNR-based cerebral angiography system: evaluation of image quality and radiation dose.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The International Commission on Radiological Protection has reduced the occupational eye lens dose limit to 20 mSv/year. Interventional radiology (IR) physicians are frequently exposed to high levels of scattered X-rays, and radiation protection tools, including lead glasses, are used for minimizing exposure. However, the effectiveness of lead eyewear for radiation workers who wear prescription glasses (e.g. over-glasses-type eyewear) has not been comprehensively investigated. This study evaluated the shielding effectiveness of over-glasses-type eyewear worn over plastic prescription glasses through phantom experiments. Furthermore, the dose reduction provided by the plastic lenses and front frame of the prescription glasses (excluding lead) was assessed. The over-glasses-type eyewear demonstrated high shielding effectiveness, with average shielding rates of 0.72-0.74 and 0.74-0.80 for the left and right eyes, respectively, against radiation incident from the lower left oblique, as typically encountered in clinical settings. In contrast, the plastic lenses of prescription glasses provided <9% dose reduction when it irradiated with 80- and 120-kV X-rays, indicating minimal contribution to eye protection. The plastic front frame offered a 14% reduction at 80 kV and 11% at 120 kV. These findings suggest that the front frame of the prescription glasses contributes to photon attenuation and improves overall shielding. However, the improper fit of over-glasses-type eyewear may lead to gaps, compromising its shielding effectiveness. To minimize gaps and optimize protection, IR physicians should select over-glasses-type eyewear that fits securely over prescription glasses. Additionally, combining protective tools is essential for effective eye protection.
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.