Proposing computed tomography diagnostic reference levels in Jordan: a national multicentre analysis.

Abdel-Baset Bani Yaseen, Jamie Trapp, Davide Fontanarosa

Abstract readMulticenter Study

In one paragraph

Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

A Multi-Centre Study:Saudi medical journal · 2026
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Abdel-Baset Bani YaseenSchool of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Gardens Point Campus, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia.

Jamie TrappCentre for Biomedical Technologies, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia.

Davide FontanarosaSchool of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Gardens Point Campus, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia. d3.fontanarosa@qut.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6986-3718

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increased use of CT has raised concerns about patient radiation exposure. DRLs play a crucial role in optimising radiation dose while maintaining diagnostic quality. In Jordan, the absence of officially established national DRLs across a wide range of CT procedures may contributes to dose variability between healthcare facilities.

methodsA multicentre, retrospective study was conducted across 10 hospitals in Jordan, involving 4310 adult patients (aged 18-96 years). Radiation dose metrics, including volume CTDI

resultsMarked dose variations were observed across hospitals. Head routine non-contrast CT demonstrated the highest median CTDI

conclusionThis study proposes the first national DRLs for 14 common CT examinations in Jordan, based on data collected from hospitals across the country. These benchmarks support dose optimisation, promote standardised protocols, and highlight the need for continuous radiographer training. Future initiatives should expand DRL development to paediatric populations and integrate dose tracking into national quality frameworks.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDiagnostic Reference LevelsFemaleHumansJordanMaleMiddle AgedRadiation DosageRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultComputed tomographyDiagnostic reference levelsDose optimisationRadiation doseRadiation protection

Identifiers

PMID41160377

DOI10.1093/rpd/ncv116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.