The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology
Abstract
In recent years, there has been a rapid increase in the number of CT scans performed, both in the US and the UK, which has fuelled concern about the long-term consequences of these exposures, particularly in terms of cancer induction. Statistics from the US and the UK indicate a 20-fold and 12-fold increase, respectively, in CT usage over the past two decades, with per caput CT usage in the US being about five times that in the UK. In both countries, most of the collective dose from diagnostic radiology comes from high-dose (in the radiological context) procedures such as CT, interventional radiology and barium enemas; for these procedures, the relevant organ doses are in the range for which there is now direct credible epidemiological evidence of an excess risk of cancer, without the need to extrapolate risks from higher doses. Even for high-dose radiological procedures, the risk to the individual patient is small, so that the benefit/risk balance is generally in the patients' favour. Concerns arise when CT examinations are used without a proven clinical rationale, when alternative modalities could be used with equal efficacy, or when CT scans are repeated unnecessarily. It has been estimated, at least in the US, that these scenarios account for up to one-third of all CT scans. A further issue is the increasing use of CT scans as a screening procedure in asymptomatic patients; at this time, the benefit/risk balance for any of the commonly suggested CT screening techniques has yet to be established.
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
Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure
Brenner, D. J., & Hall, E. J. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra072149 · Cited by 8,748
Self-citationQuantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography
Agatston, A. S., Janowitz, W. R., Hildner, F. J., Zusmer, N. R., Viamonte, M., & Detrano, R. (1990) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/0735-1097(90)90282-t · Cited by 7,786
Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection
(1961) · Postgraduate Medical Journal · doi:10.1136/pgmj.37.425.168-b · Cited by 5,862
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 2×
“While the results of such studies will not be available for some years, it is possible [38] to estimate the cancer risks associated with the radiation exposure from any given CT scan by measuring or calculating the organ doses involved, and applying organ-specific cancer incidence/ mortality data that were ultimately…”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationEarly Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening
Henschke, C. I., McCauley, D. I., Yankelevitz, D. F., Naidich, D. P., McGuinness, G., Miettinen, O. S., Libby, D. M., Pasmantier, M. W., Koizumi, J., Altorki, N. K., et al. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)06093-6 · Cited by 2,508
Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation:: BEIR VII Phase 2
Earth, D. O. (2006) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 2,190
Greenland, P. (2004) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.291.2.210 · Cited by 1,829
Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know
Brenner, D. J., Doll, R., Goodhead, D. T., Hall, E. J., Land, C. E., Little, J. B., Lubin, J. H., Preston, D. L., Preston, R. J., Puskin, J. S., et al. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2235592100 · Cited by 1,765
Self-citationSolid Cancer Incidence in Atomic Bomb Survivors: 1958–1998
Preston, D. L., Ron, E., Tokuoka, S., Funamoto, S., Nishi, N., Soda, M., Mabuchi, K., & Kodama, K. (2007) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr0763.1 · Cited by 1,753
Cited by
Panes, J., Bouhnik, Y., Reinisch, W., Stoker, J., Taylor, S. A., Baumgart, D. C., Danese, S., Halligan, S., Marincek, B., Matos, C., et al. (2013) · Journal of Crohn's and Colitis · doi:10.1016/j.crohns.2013.02.020 · Cited by 668
Low-dose CT reconstruction via edge-preserving total variation regularization
Tian, Z., Jia, X., Yuan, K., Pan, T., & Jiang, S. B. (2011) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/56/18/011 · Cited by 396
Papa, L., Lewis, L. M., Falk, J. L., Zhang, Z., Silvestri, S., Giordano, P., Brophy, G. M., Demery, J. A., Dixit, N. K., Ferguson, I., et al. (2012) · Annals of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.08.021 · Cited by 332
A systematic survey of computer-aided diagnosis in medicine: Past and present developments
Yanase, J., & Triantaphyllou, E. (2019) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.112821 · Cited by 303
Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland
Foley, S. J., McEntee, M. F., & Rainford, L. A. (2012) · The British Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1259/bjr/15839549 · Cited by 186
Metadata
- Authors
- HALL, E. J., & BRENNER, D. J.
- Venue
- The British Journal of Radiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-05
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 965
- Pages
- 362-378
- ISSN
- 0007-1285 (ISSN-L)
- 1748-880X
- OpenAlex
- W2121571320
- Cited by
- 915
- References
- 85
- FWCI
- 48.74
- 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: Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1259/bjr/01948454
- The paper
- HALL, E. J., & BRENNER, D. J. (2008). Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology. The British Journal of Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/01948454
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.
