ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
The role of PACSs in enabling real-time dose monitoring for abdominal CT studies.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo examine the effectiveness of Picture Archiving and Communication Systems in evaluating radiation dose variability across abdominal Computed Tomography protocols and explore dose differences on the basis of contrast usage and demographic factors.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, using abdominal CT scan data archived in PACSs from January 2023 to December 2024. A total of 200 adult patients (100 males, 100 females) were included. Variables analyzed included CTDIvol, DLP, age, gender, clinical indication, scanner type, contrast usage, and CT protocols. Statistical analysis involved Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis H tests, with a significance threshold of p < 0.05.
resultsContrast-enhanced scans demonstrated higher radiation doses compared with non-contrast scans. No significant gender-based differences were observed. Substantial variability in CTDIvol and DLP was found across nine abdominal CT protocols (CTDIvol: χ² = 141.93, p < 0.001; DLP: χ² = 120.89, p < 0.001), with CT urography and triphasic liver scans yielding the highest doses.
conclusionPACS-based dose monitoring demonstrates large variations in radiation exposure depending on contrast use and protocols. The inclusion of real-time dose monitoring through PACSs can improve protocol standardization and patient safety in radiology departments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41134368What 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.