ReviewMedical physics2026
Patient radiation dosimetry for fluoroscopically guided interventions - a review of the history and limitations.
Review in Medical physics, 2026. 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.
- Patient radiation dosimetry for fluoroscopically guided interventions - a review of the history and limitations.Medical physics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fluoroscopically guided interventions (FGIs) play a critical role in modern medicine, though they potentially deliver high radiation doses that require accurate and patient-specific dosimetry for risk assessment and patient management. This review provides a historical overview of radiation dosimetry in fluoroscopy, tracing the evolution from rudimentary dose estimation methods to modern tools leveraging standardized dose indices and radiation dose structured reports (RDSRs) for radiation dosimetry at the skin surface as well as at depth in soft tissue. Despite these advancements, substantial uncertainties remain due to technical limitations, beam geometry, dose mapping challenges, and hardware-induced variability. Key sources of uncertainty are examined, some well-known and others that are not well-understood. This work also underscores the need for a deeper understanding of the assumptions and limitations in automated dosimetry systems and calls for enhanced reporting standards and dose mapping capabilities to improve accuracy. Addressing these limitations is essential for integrating radiobiological principles into clinical medical physics and optimizing patient care in FGIs.
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.