Free Access
Volume 52, Number 2, April–June 2017
Page(s) 81 - 86
Published online 27 February 2017
  • AAPM. 2011. Size-Specific Dose Estimates (SSDE) in Pediatric and Adult Body CT Examinations. Report of AAPM Task Group 204. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 14: 14–15. [Google Scholar]
  • Balonov M, Shrimpton P. 2012. Effective dose and risks from medical X-ray procedures. Ann. ICRP 41(3): 129–141. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Brenner DJ. 2008. Effective dose: a flawed concept that could and should be replaced. Br. J. Radiol. 81: 521–523. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Cardis E, Vrijheid M, Blettner M, et al. 2007. The 15-country collaborative study of cancer risk among radiation workers in the nuclear industry: estimates of radiation-related cancer risks. Radiat. Res. 167(4): 396–416. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen W, Kolditz D, Beister M, Bohle R, Kalender WA. 2012. Fast on-site Monte Carlo tool for dose calculations in CT applications. Med. Phys. 39(6): 2985–2996. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Costantino MM, Randall G, Gosselin M, Brandt M, Spinning K, Vegas CD. 2008. CT angiography in the evaluation of acute pulmonary embolus. Am. J. Roentgenol. 191(2): 471–474. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cristy M, Eckerman K. 1987. Specific absorbed fractions of energy at various ages from internal photon sources. ORNL/TM-8381. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. [Google Scholar]
  • Deak P, Van Straten M, Shrimpton PC, Zankl M, Kalender WA. 2008. Validation of a Monte Carlo tool for patient-specific dose simulations in multi-slice computed tomography. Eur. Radiol. 18(4): 759–772. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Diederich S. 2003. Radiation dose in helical CT for detection of pulmonary embolism. Eur. Radiol. 13(7): 1491–1493. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Einstein AJ, Sanz J, Dellegrottaglie S, et al. 2008. Radiation dose and cancer risk estimates in 16-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. J. Nucl. Cardiol. 15(2): 232–240. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • European Union, European Commission, Directorate-General XII-Science, R. and Development. 1996. European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images in paediatrics. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. [Google Scholar]
  • Fedullo PF, Tapson VF. 2003. The evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism. N. Engl. J. Med. 349(13): 1247–1256. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • He J, Wang F, Dai HJ, et al. 2012. Chinese multi-center study of lung scintigraphy and CT pulmonary angiography for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imag. 28(7): 1799–1805. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Heyer CM, Mohr PS, Lemburg SP, Peters SA, Nicolas V. 2007. Image quality and radiation exposure at pulmonary CT angiography with 100-or 120-kvp protocol: prospective randomized study. Radiology 245(2): 577–83. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Huda W, He W. 2012. Estimating cancer risks to adults undergoing body CT examinations. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 150(2): 168–179. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • IAEA. 2012. Quality assurance programme for computed tomography: Diagnostic and therapy applications. Vienna: Human Health Series No. 19. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP Publication 34. 1982. Protection of the Patient in Diagnostic Radiology. Ann. ICRP 9: 2–3. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP Publication 60. 1991. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Oxford: Annals of the ICRP, Pergamon Press. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP Publication 73. 1996. Radiological protection and safety in medicine. Ann. ICRP 26: 2–3. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP Publication 26. 1977. 1977 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann. ICRP 1: 3. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP Publication 103. 2007. The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. Ann. ICRP 37: 1–332. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP Publication 110. 2009. Adult reference computational phantoms. Ann. ICRP 39: 1–164. [Google Scholar]
  • Jones JG, Mills CN, Mogensen MA, Lee CI. 2012. Radiation dose from medical imaging: a primer for emergency physicians. West J. Emerg. Med. 13(2): 202–210. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kalender WA, Schmidt B, Zankl M, Schmidt M. 1999. A PC program for estimating organ dose and effective dose values in computed tomography. Eur. Radiol. 9(3): 555–562. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Li X, Samei E, Segars WP, Sturgeon GM, Colsher JG, Frush DP. 2011. Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk for pediatric chest CT. Radiology 259(3): 862–874. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Martin CJ. 2007. Effective dose: How should it be applied to medical exposures? Br. J. Radiol. 80(956): 639–647. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Martin CJ. 2011. Effective dose: practice, purpose and pitfalls for nuclear medicine. J. Radiol. Prot. 31(2): 205. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • McCollough CH, Christner JA, Kofler JM. 2010. How effective is effective dose as a predictor of radiation risk? Am. J. Roentgenol. 194(4): 890–896. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Musset D, Parent F, Meyer G, et al. 2002. Diagnostic strategy for patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: a prospective multicentre outcome study. Lancet 360(9349): 1914–1920. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • NRC 2006. Committee to assess health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation, national research council (NRC). Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. [Google Scholar]
  • O'Neill JM, Wright L, Murchison JT. 2004. Helical CTPA in the investigation of pulmonary embolism: a 6-year review. Clin. Radiol. 59(9): 819–825. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • O'Neill J, Murchison JT, Wright L, Williams J. 2005. Effect of the introduction of helical CT on radiation dose in the investigation of pulmonary embolism. Br. J. Radiol. 78: 46–50. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Pierce DA, Preston DL. 2000. Radiation-related cancer risks at low doses among atomic bomb survivors. Radiat. Res. 154(2): 178–186. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Pradhan AS, Kim JL, Lee JI. 2012. On the use of “effective dose” (E) in medical exposures. J. Med. Phys. 37(2): 63. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, et al. 2007. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958–1998. Radiat. Res. 168(1): 1–64. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sahbaee P, Segars WP, Samei E. 2014. Patient-based estimation of organ dose for a population of 58 adult patients across 13 protocol categories. Med. Phys. 41(7): 072104. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Shope TB, Gagne RM, Johnson GC. 1981. A method for describing the doses delivered by transmission X-ray computed tomography. Med. Phys. 8(4): 488–495. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Surgeon General 2008. Acting Surgeon General issues call to action to prevent deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Available at: [Google Scholar]
  • Tapiovaara M, Siiskonen T. 2008. A Monte Carlo program for calculating patient doses in medical X-ray examinations, STUK-A231. Helsinki: Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority. [Google Scholar]
  • Turner AC, Zankl M, DeMarco JJ, et al. 2010. The feasibility of a scanner-independent technique to estimate organ dose from MDCT scans: using CTDIvol to account for differences between scanners. Med. Phys. 37(4): 1816–1825. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Turner AC, Zhang D, Khatonabadi M, et al. 2011. The feasibility of patient size-corrected, scanner-independent organ dose estimates for abdominal CT exams. Med. Phys. 38(2): 820–829. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Vatandoost N, Salehi AR, Kazemi M, et al. 2016. Genetic polymorphism of 8 Y-STR loci in native population of Isfahan province in central part of Iran, Ann. Hum. Biol. 44(2): 175–179. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, et al. 2001. Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside without diagnostic imaging: management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism presenting to the emergency department by using a simple clinical model and d-dimer. Ann. Intern. Med. 135(2): 98–107. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Woo JK, Chiu RY, Thakur Y, Mayo JR. 2012. Risk-benefit analysis of pulmonary CT angiography in patients with suspected pulmonary embolus. Am. J. Roentgenol. 198(6): 1332–1339. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Yilmaz Ö, Üstün ED, Kayan M, et al. 2013. Diagnostic quality of CT pulmonary angiography in pulmonary thromboembolism: a comparison of three different kV values. Med. Sci. Monit. 19: 908. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.