Free Access
Issue
Radioprotection
Volume 59, Number 2, April - June
Page(s) 123 - 130
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro/2024007
Published online 03 June 2024
  • Aabid M, Semghouli S, Amaoui B, Fahssi ME, Hakam OK, Choukri A. 2019. Assessment of radiation risks during brain CT procedures in Moroccan hospitals. Indian J Public Health Res Dev 10: 713–718. [Google Scholar]
  • Amaoui B, Safini F, Lahlou L, El Fahssi M, Abbaoui Semghouli S. 2023. Physicians’ knowledge about radiation protection of patients during prescription of CT scan procedures in Morocco. Radiat Med Protect 4: 54–59. [Google Scholar]
  • Amaoui B, Semghouli S, Massaq M, Aabid M, Hakam OK, Choukri A et al. 2019. Radiation doses from Computed Tomography practice in Regional Hospital Center Hassan II of Agadir, Morocco. Indian J Public Health Res Dev 10: 629–632. [Google Scholar]
  • American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM). 2008. The Measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT, AAPM Report No. 96, pp. 16. [Google Scholar]
  • Bauhs JA, Vrieze TJ, Primak AN, Bruesewitz MR, McCollough CH. 2008. CT dosimetry: comparison of measurement techniques and devices. RadioGraphics 28: 245–253. [Google Scholar]
  • Božanić A, Šegota D, Debeljuh DD, ŠvabićKolacio M, Radojčić DS, Ružić K, et al. 2022. National reference levels of CT procedures dedicated for treatment planning in radiation oncology, Phys Med 96: 123–129. [Google Scholar]
  • Buzug T Éd. 2008. Introduction, in Computed Tomography: From Photon Statistics to Modern Cone-Beam CT. Springer. p. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  • Davis AT, Palmer AL, Nisbet A. 2017. Can CT scan protocols used for radiotherapy treatment planning be adjusted to optimize image quality and patient dose? A systematic review. Br J Radiol 90: 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  • Danish Health Authority (2015) Ct Reference doser, Copenhagen [Google Scholar]
  • Delchambre M. 2012. Calculation of the cumulative effective dose received by our patients in diagnostic tomography: creation of an IT tool for general practitioners. Grenoble Univ. Joseph-Fourier Fac. Medicine. [Google Scholar]
  • El Fahssi M, Semghouli S, Amaoui B, Jroundi L, Caoui M. 2023a. Assessment of entrance skin dose for adult patients undergoing diagnostic X-ray examinations in the Souss-Massa region of Morocco. Radioprotection 58: 107–112. [Google Scholar]
  • El Fahssi M, Semghouli S, Amaoui B, Jroundi L, Çaoui M. 2023. Patient radiation doses from adult CT examinations at the Souss Massa Regional Hospital. Radioprotection https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro/2023030 [Google Scholar]
  • Foley SJ, McEntee MF, Rainford LA. 2012. Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland. Br J Radiol 85: 1390–1397. [Google Scholar]
  • Geryes BH, Hornbeck A, Jarrige V, Pierrat N, Le Pointe HD, Dreuil S. 2019. Patient dose evaluation in computed tomography: A French national study based on clinical indications. Phys Med 61: 18–27. [Google Scholar]
  • IAEA. 2012. Quality assurance programme for Computed Tomography: Diagnostic and therapy applications. IAEA Human Health Series No. 19, IAEA, Vienna. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP. 2007. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICR P 37. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP, 2017. Diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging. ICRP Publication 135. Ann ICRP 46: 13. [Google Scholar]
  • Kanal KM, Butler PF, Sengupta D, Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Coombs LP, Morin RL. 2017. U.S. diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for 10 adult CT examinations. Radiology 284: 120–133. [Google Scholar]
  • McCollough CH. 2013. Standardization versus individualization: how each contributes to managing dose in computed tomography. Health Phys 105: 445–453. [Google Scholar]
  • Menke J. 2005. Comparison of different body size parameters for individual dose adaptation in body CT of adults. Radiology 236: 565–567. [Google Scholar]
  • OTIMROEPMQ. 2016. Order of 450 technologists in medical imaging, radio-oncology and medical electro451 physiology of Quebec. pp. 4. [Google Scholar]
  • Pedrosa KFS, Engler C, Nogueira MS. 2023. Cancer risk in healthy patients who underwent chest tomography comparing three different technologies. Appl Radiat Isotopes 193: 110625. [Google Scholar]
  • Public Health England. 2016. National Diagnostic Reference Levels (NDRLs). 456 Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/diagnostic 457 radiology-national-diagnostic-reference-levels-ndrls/nationaldiagnostic 458 reference-levels-ndrls#fnref : 2 [Google Scholar]
  • PHE. 2016. National Diagnostic Reference Levels (NDRLs). Annual Report and Accounts 2016/17. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/diagnostic-radiology-national-diagnostic-reference-levels-ndrls/nationaldiagnostic-reference-levels-ndrls#fnref: 2. [Google Scholar]
  • Raman SP, Mahesh M, Blasko RV, Fishman EK. 2013. CT scan parameters and radiation dose: practical advice for radiologists. J Am Coll Radiol 10: 840–846. [Google Scholar]
  • Richardson DB, Leuraud K, Laurier D, Gillies M, Haylock R, Kelly-Reif K et al. 2023. Cancer mortality after low dose exposure to ionising radiation in workers in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States (INWORKS): cohort study. BMJ 382: e074520. [Google Scholar]
  • Salama DH, Vassileva J, Mahdaly G, Shawki M, Salama A, Gilley D, Rehani MM. 2017. Establishing national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for computed tomography in Egypt.Phys Medica 39: 16–24. [Google Scholar]
  • Sanderud A, England A, Hogg P, Fosså K, Svensson SF, Johansen S. 2016. Radiation dose differences between thoracic radiotherapy planning CT and thoracic diagnostic CT scans. Radiography 22: 107–111. [Google Scholar]
  • Semghouli S, Aabid M, Amaoui B, Choukri A, El Kharras A. 2022. Establishment of diagnostic reference level for computed tomography of head pediatrics in Morocco: a pilot study. Mater Today: Proc 52: 85–88. [Google Scholar]
  • Semghouli S, Amaoui B, Wakrim S. 2022b. Radiation doses during computed tomography scan imaging in Hassan II Hospital, Agadir, Morocco. Pan Afr Med J 41: 290. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2022.41.290.25090 [Google Scholar]
  • Semghouli S, Amaoui B, Aabid M, El Kharras A, Choukri. 2002a. Radiation 475 risks during pediatric brain CT procedures in Morocco: a multicentre 476 study. Mater. Today: Proc. 52: 13–16. [Google Scholar]
  • Semghouli S, El Hamidi L, Aabid M, Amaoui B. in press Evaluation of radiation dose and establishment of local DRLs for adult during abdominopelvic CT scan imaging for university hospital centers, Morocco. Radioprotection. https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro/2023041 [Google Scholar]
  • Shyu JY, Sodickson AD. 2016. Communicating radiation risk to patients and referring physicians in the emergency department setting. Br J Radiol 89: 20150868. [Google Scholar]
  • Tipnis S, Thampy R, Rumboldt Z, Spampinato M, Matheus G, Huda W. 2016. Radiation intensity (CTDIvol) and visibility of anatomical structures in head CT examinations. J Appl Clin Med Phys 17: 293–300. [Google Scholar]
  • Ukoha PO, Idigo FU, Okeji MC, Joseph D, Flavious N, Onwuzu S et al. 2023. 492 Clinical indication diagnostic reference level (DRLCI) and 493 post-optimization image quality for Adult Computed Tomography 494 Examinations in Enugu, south eastern Nigeria. Radiat Phys Chem 206; 495 110728 [Google Scholar]
  • Vaño E., Miller D.L., Martin C.J., Rehani M.M., Kang K., Rosenstein M., et al. 2017. Diagnostic reference levelsin medical imaging.ICRP Publication 135. Ann ICRP 46: 1–144. [Google Scholar]
  • Zalokar N, Marciuš VZ, Mekiš N. 2020. Establishment of national diagnostic reference levels for radiotherapy computed tomography simulation procedures in Slovenia. Eur J Radiol 127: 108979. [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.