The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: Topics in CT: Radiation Dose in CT
Abstract
This article describes basic radiation dose concepts as well as those specifically developed to describe the radiation dose from computed tomography (CT). Basic concepts of radiation dose are reviewed, including exposure, absorbed dose, and effective dose. Radiation dose from CT demonstrates variations within the scan plane and along the z axis because of its unique geometry and usage. Several CT-specific dose descriptors have been developed: the Multiple Scan Average Dose descriptor, the Computed Tomography Dose Index (CTDI) and its variations (CTDI(100), CTDI(w), CTDI(vol)), and the dose-length product. Factors that affect radiation dose from CT include the beam energy, tube current-time product, pitch, collimation, patient size, and dose reduction options. Methods of reducing the radiation dose to a patient from CT include reducing the milliampere-seconds value, increasing the pitch, varying the milliampere-seconds value according to patient size, and reducing the beam energy. The effective dose from CT can be estimated by using Monte Carlo methods to simulate CT of a mathematical patient model, by estimating the energy imparted to the body region being scanned, or by using conversion factors for general anatomic regions. Issues related to radiation dose from CT are being addressed by the Society for Pediatric Radiology, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine, the American College of Radiology, and the Center for Devices and Radiological Health of the Food and Drug Administration.
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
Estimated Risks of Radiation-Induced Fatal Cancer from Pediatric CT
Brenner, D. J., Elliston, C. D., Hall, E. J., & Berdon, W. E. (2001) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.176.2.1760289 · Cited by 3,222
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
Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT
McCollough, C. H., Primak, A. N., Braun, N., Kofler, J., Yu, L., & Christner, J. (2009) · Radiologic Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2008.10.006 · Cited by 842
Han, B. K., Rigsby, C. K., Hlavacek, A., Leipsic, J., Nicol, E. D., Siegel, M. J., Bardo, D., Abbara, S., Ghoshhajra, B., Lesser, J. R., et al. (2015) · Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography · doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2015.07.004 · Cited by 211
Han, B. K., Rigsby, C. K., Leipsic, J., Bardo, D., Abbara, S., Ghoshhajra, B., Lesser, J. R., Raman, S. V., Crean, A. M., Nicol, E. D., et al. (2015) · Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography · doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2015.07.007 · Cited by 158
Diagnostic reference levels from the ACR CT accreditation program
McCollough, C., Branham, T., Herlihy, V., Bhargavan, M., Robbins, L., Bush, K., McNitt-Gray, M., Payne, J. T., Ruckdeschel, T., Pfeiffer, D., et al. (2011) · Journal of the American College of Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2011.03.014 · Cited by 98
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- McNitt-Gray, M. F.
- Venue
- RadioGraphics
- Published
- 2002-11
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1541-1553
- ISSN
- 0271-5333 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1323
- OpenAlex
- W2149756029
- Cited by
- 612
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.35
- 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: AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: Topics in CT: Radiation Dose in CT. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/rg.226025128
- The paper
- McNitt-Gray, M. F. (2002). AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: Topics in CT: Radiation Dose in CT. RadioGraphics. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.226025128
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.