The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Radiologic and Nuclear Medicine Studies in the United States and Worldwide: Frequency, Radiation Dose, and Comparison with Other Radiation Sources—1950–2007
Abstract
The U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radiation each conducted respective assessments of all radiation sources in the United States and worldwide. The goal of this article is to summarize and combine the results of these two publicly available surveys and to compare the results with historical information. In the United States in 2006, about 377 million diagnostic and interventional radiologic examinations and 18 million nuclear medicine examinations were performed. The United States accounts for about 12% of radiologic procedures and about one-half of nuclear medicine procedures performed worldwide. In the United States, the frequency of diagnostic radiologic examinations has increased almost 10-fold (1950-2006). The U.S. per-capita annual effective dose from medical procedures has increased about sixfold (0.5 mSv [1980] to 3.0 mSv [2006]). Worldwide estimates for 2000-2007 indicate that 3.6 billion medical procedures with ionizing radiation (3.1 billion diagnostic radiologic, 0.5 billion dental, and 37 million nuclear medicine examinations) are performed annually. Worldwide, the average annual per-capita effective dose from medicine (about 0.6 mSv of the total 3.0 mSv received from all sources) has approximately doubled in the past 10-15 years.
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
Cites
Effective Doses in Radiology and Diagnostic Nuclear Medicine: A Catalog
Mettler, F. A., Huda, W., Yoshizumi, T. T., & Mahesh, M. (2008) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2481071451 · Cited by 2,008
Self-citationNCRP report no. 93: Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States
Eckelman, W. C. (1988) · International Journal of Radiation Applications and Instrumentation. Part B. Nuclear Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1016/0883-2897(88)90020-7 · Cited by 755
Radiation Protection in Medicine
(2007) · Annals of the ICRP · doi:10.1016/j.icrp.2008.07.001 · Cited by 641
Effective dose: how should it be applied to medical exposures?
Martin, C. J. (2007) · The British Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1259/bjr/25922439 · Cited by 377
(2007) · Annals of the ICRP · doi:10.1016/j.icrp.2007.11.001 · Cited by 256
(1991) · Annals of the ICRP · doi:10.1016/0146-6453(91)90065-o · Cited by 189
Patient exposure in medical X-ray imaging in Europe
Regulla, D. F., & Eder, H. (2005) · Radiation Protection Dosimetry · doi:10.1093/rpd/nch538 · Cited by 131
National CT use and radiation exposure: United States 1983
Evens, R., & Mettler, F. A. (1985) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.144.5.1077 · Cited by 31
Self-citationShannoun, F., Zeeb, H., Back, C., & Blettner, M. (2006) · Health Physics · doi:10.1097/01.hp.0000205237.00357.58 · Cited by 25
Cited by
McCollough, C. H., Bartley, A. C., Carter, R. E., Chen, B., Drees, T. A., Edwards, P., Holmes, D. R., Huang, A. E., Khan, F., Leng, S., et al. (2017) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1002/mp.12345 · Cited by 308
de Gonzalez, A. B., Salotti, J. A., McHugh, K., Little, M. P., Harbron, R. W., Lee, C., Ntowe, E., Braganza, M. Z., Parker, L., Rajaraman, P., et al. (2016) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2015.415 · Cited by 244
Khader, F., Kather, J. N., Müller-Franzes, G., Wang, T., Han, T., Tayebi Arasteh, S., Hamesch, K., Bressem, K., Haarburger, C., Stegmaier, J., et al. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-37835-1 · Cited by 57
Pasqual, E., Turner, M. C., Gracia-Lavedan, E., Casabonne, D., Benavente, Y., Chef, I. T., Maynadié, M., Cocco, P., Staines, A., Foretova, L., et al. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0235658 · Cited by 8
Diagnostic reference levels in spinal CT: Jordanian assessments and global benchmarks
Rawashdeh, M., Bani Yaseen, A.-B., McEntee, M., England, A., Kumar, P., & Saade, C. (2024) · Journal of X-Ray Science and Technology: Clinical Applications of Diagnosis and Therapeutics · doi:10.3233/xst-230276 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Mettler, F. A., Bhargavan, M., Faulkner, K., Gilley, D. B., Gray, J. E., Ibbott, G. S., Lipoti, J. A., Mahesh, M., McCrohan, J. L., Stabin, M. G., Thomadsen, B. R., & Yoshizumi, T. T.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2009-11
- Volume
- 253
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 520-531
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W1998473914
- Cited by
- 853
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 32.65
- 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: Radiologic and Nuclear Medicine Studies in the United States and Worldwide: Frequency, Radiation Dose, and Comparison with Other Radiation Sources—1950–2007. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2532082010
- The paper
- Mettler, F. A., Bhargavan, M., Faulkner, K., Gilley, D. B., Gray, J. E., Ibbott, G. S., Lipoti, J. A., Mahesh, M., McCrohan, J. L., Stabin, M. G., Thomadsen, B. R., & Yoshizumi, T. T. (2009). Radiologic and Nuclear Medicine Studies in the United States and Worldwide: Frequency, Radiation Dose, and Comparison with Other Radiation Sources—1950–2007. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2532082010
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.
