ArticleWorld journal of radiology2026
Study of displayed radiation dose and size-specific dose estimate from computed tomography brain examinations in accordance to head sizes.
Article in World journal of radiology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study is based on American Association of Physicist in Medicine (AAPM) task group (TG) report 204 to compare the displayed and calculated Radiation dose imparted to the patient in computed tomography (CT) head examination and the effective dose.
aimTo identify whether there is a difference between displayed radiation doses and size-specific dose in CT head imaging. For ruling out the possibility of dose estimation difference.
methodsA prospective cross-sectional study was done on CT head examinations using multidetector CT. The study included subjects aged between 18 and 60 years with no obvious morphological head deformities. We compared the size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) displayed and calculated where we used f factor for effective diameter from AAPM report 204 and manually calculated the SSDE for comparison. We also calculated the effective dose for head CT manually using dose-length product and k value from AAPM report 96.
resultsThe difference between SSDE Calculated and displayed was found to be -11.99%, the negative value depicts that the SSDE displayed in the patient dose chart in CT is much lower than the calculated SSDE. Hence it highly underestimates the dose received by the patient and further cancer risk estimation. We also found that the radiation dose received by patient is inversely related to the effective diameter of their head.
conclusionThe observed difference between the calculated and displayed dose values falls within the acceptable range of 10%-20% as recommended by the AAPM TG report 204, indicating consistency with established guidelines.
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.