Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,355

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Benefits and costs, an eternal balance

Dixon, Adrian K.·2007·Annals of the ICRP

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) technology has changed considerably in recent years with the introduction of increasing numbers of multiple detector arrays. There are several parameters specific to multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) scanners that increase or decrease patient dose systematically compared to older single detector computed tomography (SDCT) scanners. This document briefly reviews the MDCT technology, radiation dose in MDCT, including differences from SDCT and factors that affect dose, radiation risks, and the responsibilities for patient dose management. The document recommends that users need to understand the relationship between patient dose and image quality and be aware that image quality in CT is often higher than that necessary for diagnostic confidence. Automatic exposure control (AEC) does not totally free the operator from selection of scan parameters, and awareness of individual systems is important. Scanning protocols cannot simply be transferred between scanners from different manufacturers and should be determined for each MDCT. If the image quality is appropriately specified by the user, and suited to the clinical task, there will be a reduction in patient dose for most patients. Understanding of some parameters is not intuitive and the selection of image quality parameter values in AEC systems is not straightforward. Examples of some clinical situation shave been included to demonstrate dose management, e.g. CT examinations of the chest, the heart for coronary calcium quantification and non-invasive coronary angiography, colonography, the urinary tract, children, pregnant patients, trauma cases, and CT guided interventions. CT is increasingly being used to replace conventional x-ray studies and it is important that patient dose is given careful consideration, particularly with repeated or multiple examinations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.icrp.2007.09.001

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 10.1259/bjr/14928972 · doi:10.1259/bjr/14928972
  2. 10.1007/s00330-001-1268-z · doi:10.1007/s00330-001-1268-z
  3. 10.1136/bmj.325.7377.1387 · DOI
  4. RCR, 2007, Making the best use of Radiological Services: guidelines for doctors
  5. 10.1002/cncr.22668 · doi:10.1002/cncr.22668

Cited by

See all 1,355

Metadata

Authors
Dixon, A. K.
Venue
Annals of the ICRP
Published
2007-03
Volume
37
Issue
1
Pages
1-3
ISSN
  • 0146-6453 (ISSN-L)
  • 1872-969X
OpenAlex
W2087044912
Cited by
1,355
References
0
FWCI
30.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Benefits and costs, an eternal balance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.icrp.2007.09.001
The paper
Dixon, A. K. (2007). Benefits and costs, an eternal balance. Annals of the ICRP. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icrp.2007.09.001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.