ArticleRadiological physics and technology2026
Regional mammography dosimetry in South India: establishing modality and thickness-specific diagnostic reference levels.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe mean glandular dose (MGD) is the key indicator for assessing radiation risk in mammography. International bodies such as the ICRP and IAEA recommend diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) to support optimization, yet India lacks national benchmarks. This study reports the first multicenter dosimetric survey in Tamil Nadu to derive modality- and thickness-specific DRLs.
methodsFrom 2023 to 2025, 100 mammography units (70 CR, 20 DR, 10 DBT) across public and private facilities were evaluated. Entrance surface air kerma (ESAK), half-value layer (HVL), and compression force were measured on 30–90 mm PMMA phantoms using a calibrated solidstate detector and a parallel-plate ionization chamber. MGD was calculated with the Dance model, and 75th percentile values were adopted as DRLs following ICRP 135. Inter-detector agreement was assessed by percentage difference.
resultsMGD increased with phantom thickness. Ion chamber-based DRLs ranged from 0.8 to 4.0 mGy for CR, 0.7–3.9 mGy for DR, and 1.3–4.5 mGy for DBT. DR demonstrated superior dose efficiency compared with CR, while DBT produced higher values due to tomographic acquisitions. Agreement between detectors was excellent (≤ 3%), validating solid-state use for large-scale surveys. Tamil Nadu DRLs were comparable to or lower than UK, Irish, and Australian values and remained well below the U.S. MQSA regulatory threshold.
conclusionThis survey establishes the first regional ion-chamber–based DRLs for mammography in India. The findings align with international standards, provide a framework for clinical dose optimization, and form the basis for national DRL development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41604134What 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.