Relationships of radiation dose indices with body size indices in adult body computed tomography
Open accessAbstract
We investigated the relationships between radiation dose indices and body size indices in adult body computed tomography (CT). A total of 3200 CT scans of the thoracic, abdominal, abdominopelvic, or thoraco-abdominopelvic regions performed using one of four CT scanners were analyzed. Volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP) were compared with various body size indices derived from CT images (water-equivalent diameter, WED; effective diameter, ED) and physical measurements (weight, weight/height, body mass index, and body surface area). CTDIvol showed excellent positive linear correlations with WED and ED. CTDIvol also showed high linear correlations with physical measurement-based indices, whereas the correlation coefficients were lower than for WED and ED. Among the physical measurement-based indices, weight/height showed the strongest correlations, followed by weight. Compared to CTDIvol, the correlation coefficients with DLP tended to be lower for WED, ED, and weight/height and higher for weight. The standard CTDIvol values at 60 kg and dose increase ratios with increasing weight, estimated using the regression equations, differed among scanners. Radiation dose indices closely correlated with body size indices such as WED, ED, weight/height, and weight. The relationships between dose and body size differed among scanners, indicating the significance of dose management considering body size.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The present study demonstrated the lowest radiation exposure for both dose descriptors compared with modern studies.
“The present study demonstrated the lowest radiation exposure for both dose descriptors.”
From Establishing Diagnostic Reference Level for Adult Abdomen and Pelvis CT Scans: A Benchmarking Study across BMI Groups (2026) · cites this paper as [14]
The Results (section 3.2; page unavailable) report that, at a standard body weight of 60 kg, the Siemens scanner had a lower standard dose than the other scanners studied. The Introduction identifies CTDIvol and DLP as the two dose indices. This is a comparison among scanners at one facility, not evidence that the citing study had the lowest exposure for both descriptors compared with modern studies. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe DRLs established in this study are lower than national and international benchmarks.
“demonstrating lower radiation doses than national and international benchmarks.”
From Establishing Diagnostic Reference Level for Adult Abdomen and Pelvis CT Scans: A Benchmarking Study across BMI Groups (2026) · cites this paper as [14]
The Introduction discusses DRLs generally, while the Results (section 3.2) compare estimated standard doses among scanners at the study facility. Searches for national and international benchmarks found no passage establishing study DRLs or comparing its doses with those benchmarks. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredStudies in Japan reported CTDIvol 18.2 mGy and DLP 870.9 mGy·cm.
“studies conducted in Portugal (CTDIvol: 18 mGy, DLP: 800 mGy·cm) and Japan (CTDIvol: 18.2 mGy, DLP: 870.9 mGy·cm) reflect significantly higher dose levels. 9 14”
From Establishing Diagnostic Reference Level for Adult Abdomen and Pelvis CT Scans: A Benchmarking Study across BMI Groups (2026) · cites this paper as [14]
The Results (§3.2; page unavailable) discuss CTDIvol and DLP and refer to standard-dose values in Table 3, but the passages in our copy do not give the claimed pair of values. Searches for “18.2” and “870.9” found no passage reporting those figures for Japan. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
A formula to estimate the approximate surface area if height and weight be known. 1916.
Bois, D. D., & Bois, E. F. D. (1989) · PubMed · Cited by 5,303 · see citing works
Pearce, M. S., Salotti, J. A., Little, M. P., McHugh, K., Lee, C., Kim, K. P., Howe, N. L., Ronckers, C. M., Rajaraman, P., Craft, A. W., et al. (2012) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60815-0 · Cited by 3,735 · see citing works
Mathews, J. D., Forsythe, A. V., Brady, Z., Butler, M. W., Goergen, S. K., Byrnes, G. B., Giles, G. G., Wallace, A. B., Anderson, P. R., Guiver, T. A., et al. (2013) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.f2360 · Cited by 2,029 · see citing works
Benefits and costs, an eternal balance
Dixon, A. K. (2007) · Annals of the ICRP · doi:10.1016/j.icrp.2007.09.001 · Cited by 1,355 · see citing works
ICRP Publication 135: Diagnostic Reference Levels in Medical Imaging
Vañó, E., Miller, D. L., Martin, C. J., Rehani, M. M., Kang, K., Rosenstein, M., Ortiz-López, P., Mattsson, S., Padovani, R., & Rogers, A. (2017) · Annals of the ICRP · doi:10.1177/0146645317717209 · Cited by 1,043 · see citing works
Techniques and Applications of Automatic Tube Current Modulation for CT
Kalra, M. K., Maher, M. M., Toth, T. L., Schmidt, B. T., Westerman, B. L., Morgan, H. T., & Saini, S. (2004) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2333031150 · Cited by 728 · see citing works
U.S. Diagnostic Reference Levels and Achievable Doses for 10 Adult CT Examinations
Kanal, K. M., Butler, P. F., Sengupta, D., Bhargavan, M., Coombs, L. P., & Morin, R. L. (2017) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2017161911 · Cited by 397 · see citing works
Radiation exposure from pediatric CT scans and subsequent cancer risk in The Netherlands
Meulepas, J. M., Ronckers, C. M., Smets, A. M. J. B., Nievelstein, R. A. J., Gradowska, P., Lee, C., Jahnen, A., van Straten, M., de Wit, M.-C. Y., Zonnenberg, B., et al. (2019) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djy104 · Cited by 360 · see citing works
Mulkens, T. H., Bellinck, P., Baeyaert, M., Ghysen, D., Dijck, X. V., Mussen, E., Venstermans, C., & Termote, J. L. (2005) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2363041220 · Cited by 354 · see citing works
Radiation Dose Modulation Techniques in the Multidetector CT Era: From Basics to Practice
Lee, C. H., Goo, J. M., Ye, H. J., Ye, S., Park, C. M., Chun, E. J., & Im, J.-G. (2008) · Radiographics · doi:10.1148/rg.285075075 · Cited by 315 · see citing works
Managing patient dose in Multi-Detector Computed Tomography (MDCT)
Valentin, J. (2007) · Cited by 275 · see citing works
McCollough, C. H., Bakalyar, D., Bostani, M., Brady, S. L., Boedeker, K., Boone, J. M., Chen‐Mayer, H. H., Christianson, O. I., Leng, S., Li, B., et al. (2014) · PubMed · Cited by 269 · see citing works
Söderberg, M., & Gunnarsson, M. (2010) · Acta Radiologica · doi:10.3109/02841851003698206 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
Size-specific Dose Estimates for Adult Patients at CT of the Torso
Christner, J. A., Braun, N. N., Jacobsen, M. C., Carter, R. E., Kofler, J. M., & McCollough, C. H. (2012) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.12112365 · Cited by 188 · see citing works
Israel, G. M., Cicchiello, L. A., Brink, J. A., & Huda, W. (2010) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.09.3331 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Järvinen, H., Seuri, R. M., Kortesniemi, M., Lajunen, A., Hallinen, E., Savikurki-Heikkilä, P., Laarne, P., Perhomaa, M., & Tyrväinen, E. (2015) · Radiation Protection Dosimetry · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncv044 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
An evaluation of organ dose modulation on a GE optima CT660‐computed tomography scanner
Dixon, M., Loader, R. J., Stevens, G., & Rowles, N. (2016) · Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · doi:10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.5724 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Gandhi, D., Crotty, D. J., Stevens, G. M., & Schmidt, T. G. (2015) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.4933197 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Sookpeng, S., Martin, C. J., Gentle, D. J., & López-Gonzalez, M. R. (2013) · Journal of Radiological Protection · doi:10.1088/0952-4746/34/1/103 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Patient Size–Specific Analysis of Dose Indexes From CT Lung Cancer Screening
Fujii, K., McMillan, K. L., Bostani, M., Cagnon, C. H., & McNitt‐Gray, M. F. (2016) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.16.16082 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Inoue, Y. (2021) · Seminars in Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2021.11.009 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Self-citationInoue, Y., Nagahara, K., Kudo, H., & Itoh, H. (2018) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Self-citationComputed tomography automatic exposure control techniques in 18F-FDG oncology PET-CT scanning
Iball, G. R., & Tout, D. (2014) · Nuclear Medicine Communications · doi:10.1097/mnm.0000000000000064 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Radiation Dose Management in Pediatric Brain CT According to Age and Weight as Continuous Variables
Inoue, Y., Itoh, H., Waga, A., Sasa, R., & Mitsui, K. (2022) · Tomography · doi:10.3390/tomography8020079 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Self-citationSimplified size adjusted dose reference levels for adult CT examinations: A regional study
Moghadam, N., Lecomte, R., Mercure, S., Rehani, M. M., & Nassiri, M. A. (2021) · European Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109861 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Inoue, Y., Itoh, H., Miyatake, H., Hata, H., Sasa, R., Shiibashi, N., & Mitsui, K. (2022) · Tomography · doi:10.3390/tomography8060246 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citationRadiation Dose Management in Computed Tomography: Introduction to the Practice at a Single Facility
Inoue, Y. (2023) · Tomography · doi:10.3390/tomography9030078 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citationImplementation of Institutional Size-Specific Diagnostic Reference Levels for CT Angiography
Klosterkemper, Y., Thomas, C. K., Bethge, O., Appel, E., Aissa, J., Böven, J., Antoch, G., & Boos, J. (2019) · Academic Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.acra.2019.01.019 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Implementation of Size-Dependent Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for CT Angiography
Boere, H., Eijsvoogel, N. G., Sailer, A. M., Wildberger, J. E., de Haan, M. W., Das, M., & Jeukens, C. R. L. P. N. (2018) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.17.18566 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Inoue, Y., Takahashi, K., Miyatake, H., Nagahara, K., & Iwasaki, R. (2022) · Journal of Radiological Protection · doi:10.1088/1361-6498/ac6a89 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citationMONITORING DOSE–LENGTH PRODUCT IN COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY OF THE CHEST CONSIDERING SEX AND BODY WEIGHT
Inoue, Y., Nagahara, K., Hayakawa, N., Hanawa, H., & Hata, H. (2015) · Radiation Protection Dosimetry · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncv401 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citationEffectiveness of body size stratification for patient exposure optimization in Computed Tomography
Monte, F. D., Sapignoli, S., Cortinovis, A. L., Maggio, A. D., Nardin, M., Pizzirani, E., Scagliori, E., Volpe, A., Paiusco, M., & Roggio, A. (2023) · European Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.110804 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Chest Computed Tomography Radiation Dose Optimization
Gyssels, E., Bohy, P., Cornil, A., Muylem, A. V., Howarth, N., Gevenois, P. A., & Tack, D. (2015) · Journal of Thoracic Imaging · doi:10.1097/rti.0000000000000177 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Abuzaid, M. (2025) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics15060740 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Almohammed, H. I., Elshami, W., Hamd, Z. Y., & Abuzaid, M. (2024) · Tomography · doi:10.3390/tomography10050049 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Bandinelli, F., Benucci, M., Mallia, I., Mauro, I., Pecani, N., Gobbi, F. L., Manfredi, M., Guiducci, S., Lari, B., Grossi, V., et al. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm13123534 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
M., J. M., U., R., U., S. K., Shetty, L., Dabholkar, A., & Ramachandraiah, C. (2026) · Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging · doi:10.1055/s-0045-1806868 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“All these indices demonstrated a strong positive correlation with CTDIvol and DLP. 17 Setting DRLs at the 75th percentile offers a strong basisfor dose optimization.”
Noto, Y., Kuramoto, T., Watanabe, K., & Chida, K. (2025) · Tomography · doi:10.3390/tomography11100110 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Yasui, K., Kasugai, Y., Morishita, M., Saito, Y., Shimizu, H., Uezono, H., & Hayashi, N. (2025) · Radiological Physics and Technology · doi:10.1007/s12194-025-00967-2 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Malbaša, J. D., Kuzmanović, P., Zarić, B., Kovačević, T., Čapo, N., Vukoja, M. K., & Srećković, M. (2026) · Radiography · doi:10.1016/j.radi.2026.103340 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Alsleem, M. H. (2024) · Saudi Journal of Radiology · doi:10.55038/sjr.v2i2.168 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Gupta, N., & Nagpal, K. (2025) · Current Radiopharmaceuticals · doi:10.2174/0118744710373025250423042401 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Merry, A., Diartama, A. A. A., & Sukadana, I. K. (2023) · Jurnal Rumpun Ilmu Kesehatan · doi:10.55606/jrik.v3i3.2684
Winkler, A. R., Campos, J. D., & Winkler, M. L. (2024) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2024.10.30.24316447
Delvihardini, R., Pratama, I. B. G. P., Milvita, D., Oktavia, A., & Fardela, R. (2025) · Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika dan Teknologi · doi:10.29303/jpft.v11i1.8435
Pereira, M. J., Abrantes, A. M., Matafome, P. N., & Santos, J. (2025) · Radiography · doi:10.1016/j.radi.2025.103180
Igoniye, W., Briggs-Kamara, M. A., Israel-Cookey, C., Sigalo, F. B., & Njeh, C. F. (2024) · doi:10.26634/djhm.1.2.21005
Obesity as a determinant of radiation burden in the cardiac catheterization laboratory
Khanna, S., Burgess, D., Sivagangabalan, G., Kirtane, A. J., Nerlekar, N., Picano, E., Serruys, P. W. J. C., & Bhat, A. (2026) · Cardiovascular revascularization medicine · doi:10.1016/j.carrev.2026.08.002
Lee, K., Shim, J., & Lee, Y. (2026) · Journal of Imaging · doi:10.3390/jimaging12080383
- Authors
- Inoue, Y., Itoh, H., Nagahara, K., Hata, H., & Mitsui, K.
- Affiliations
- Kitasato University (JP)
- Kitasato University Hospital (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Inoue, Yusuke
- ORCID
- Inoue, Yusuke
- Venue
- Tomography
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2023-07-14
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1381-1392
- ISSN
- 2379-1381 (ISSN-L)
- 2379-139X
- PMC
- PMC10366833
- OpenAlex
- W4384340347
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 2.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Tomography (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiation Dose and Imaging
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Digital Radiography and Breast Imaging
- Keywords
- radiation dose, body size, volume CT dose index, dose-length product, water-equivalent diameter, effective diameter, body mass index, body surface area, dose management
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Humans, Radiation Dosage, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Tomography Scanners, X-Ray Computed, Phantoms, Imaging, Body Size
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
