The DOI matches its Crossref record.
CT scanning: patterns of use and dose
Abstract
CT scanning is a relatively high-dose procedure. In spite of the use of magnetic resonance imaging, with faster CT scanners and helical techniques CT is becoming more common. There are few data from practice in the United States regarding the age and sex distribution of patients receiving CT scans, what type of scan and how many scans they receive, or how much radiation dose CT scans contribute. We reviewed over 33,700 consecutive CT examinations done at our institution in 1998 and 1999. Information on the types of scans as well as the age and sex distribution of the patients was determined. Between 1990 and 1999, CT examinations in our institution increased from 6.1% to 11.1% of all radiology procedures. Nineteen per cent of all patients seen in our department in the last year had at least one CT scan and more than half had multiple scans on the same day. Thirty-six per cent of all patients had a prior CT examination done on an earlier date. The male/female ratio of patients was 56/44. Studies of children age 0-15 years comprised 11.2% of scans. The highest percentage of scans was done in the 36-50-year-old age group. CT scanning accounted for 67% of the effective dose from diagnostic radiology. In most large hospitals in the United States CT scanning probably accounts for more than 10% of diagnostic radiology examinations and about two-thirds of the radiation dose. Most patients have multiple scan sequences. Studies done on children are probably more common than previously thought.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cited by
Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology
HALL, E. J., & BRENNER, D. J. (2008) · The British Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1259/bjr/01948454 · Cited by 915
Strauss, K. J., Goske, M. J., Kaste, S. C., Bulas, D., Frush, D. P., Butler, P., Morrison, G., Callahan, M. J., & Applegate, K. E. (2010) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.09.4091 · Cited by 305
Establishment of diagnostic reference levels in cardiac computed tomography
Rawashdeh, M., Saade, C., Zaitoun, M., Abdelrahman, M., Brennan, P., Alewaidat, H., & McEntee, M. F. (2019) · Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · doi:10.1002/acm2.12711 · Cited by 21
Bosch de Basea, M., Espinosa, A., Gil, M., Figuerola, J., Pardina, M., Vilar, J., & Cardis, E. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0196449 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Mettler, F. A., Wiest, P. W., Locken, J. A., & Kelsey, C. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Radiological Protection
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2000-11-22
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 353-359
- ISSN
- 0952-4746 (ISSN-L)
- 1361-6498
- OpenAlex
- W2068823200
- Cited by
- 664
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0952-4746/20/4/301
- The paper
- Mettler, F. A., Wiest, P. W., Locken, J. A., & Kelsey, C. A. (2000). CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. Journal of Radiological Protection. https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/20/4/301
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.