The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Size-specific Dose Estimates for Adult Patients at CT of the Torso
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine relationships among patient size, scanner radiation output, and size-specific dose estimates (SSDEs) for adults who underwent computed tomography (CT) of the torso. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Informed consent was waived for this institutional review board-approved study of existing data from 545 adult patients (322 men, 223 women) who underwent clinically indicated CT of the torso between April 1, 2007, and May 13, 2007. Automatic exposure control was used to adjust scanner output for each patient according to the measured CT attenuation. The volume CT dose index (CTDI(vol)) was used with measurements of patient size (anterioposterior plus lateral dimensions) and the conversion factors from the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 204 to determine SSDE. Linear regression models were used to assess the dependence of CTDI(vol) and SSDE on patient size. RESULTS: Patient sizes ranged from 42 to 84 cm. In this range,CTDI(vol) was significantly correlated with size (slope = 0.34 mGy/cm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31, 0.37 mGy/cm; R(2) = 0.48; P < .001), but SSDE was independent of size (slope = 0.02 mGy/cm; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.07 mGy/cm; R(2) = 0.003; P = .3). These R(2) values indicated that patient size explained 48% of the observed variability in CTDI(vol) but less than 1% of the observed variability in SSDE. The regression of CTDI(vol) versus patient size demonstrated that, in the 42-84-cm range, CTDI(vol) varied from 12 to 26 mGy. However, use of the evaluated automatic exposure control system to adjust scanner output for patient size resulted in SSDE values that were independent of size. CONCLUSION: For the evaluated automatic exposure control system,CTDI(vol) (scanner output) increased linearly with patient size; however, patient dose (as indicated by SSDE) was independent of size.
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
Deep learning reconstruction improves image quality of abdominal ultra-high-resolution CT
Akagi, M., Nakamura, Y., Higaki, T., Narita, K., Honda, Y., Zhou, J., Yu, Z., Akino, N., & Awai, K. (2019) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-019-06170-3 · Cited by 346
(2020) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · doi:10.22038/aojnmb.2019.40863.1276 · Cited by 18
Relationships of radiation dose indices with body size indices in adult body computed tomography
Inoue, Y., Itoh, H., Nagahara, K., Hata, H., & Mitsui, K. (2023) · Tomography · doi:10.3390/tomography9040110 · Cited by 16
Diagnostic Reference Levels of Radiographic and CT Examinations in Jordan: A Systematic Review
Alzyoud, K., Al-Murshedi, S., & England, A. (2024) · Health Physics · doi:10.1097/hp.0000000000001778 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Christner, J. A., Braun, N. N., Jacobsen, M. C., Carter, R. E., Kofler, J. M., & McCollough, C. H.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2012-12
- Volume
- 265
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 841-847
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2135658961
- Cited by
- 188
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.90
- 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: Size-specific Dose Estimates for Adult Patients at CT of the Torso. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.12112365
- The paper
- Christner, J. A., Braun, N. N., Jacobsen, M. C., Carter, R. E., Kofler, J. M., & McCollough, C. H. (2012). Size-specific Dose Estimates for Adult Patients at CT of the Torso. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12112365
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.