Evidence Hub

Using personal monitoring data to derive organ doses for medical radiation workers in the Million Person Study—considerations regarding NCRP Commentary no. 30

C. Yoder, S. Balter, J. Boice, H. Grogan, M. Mumma, L. Rothenberg, C. Passmore, R. Vetter et al.

Journal of Radiological Protection, 2020

9 citations

Abstract

The study of low dose and low-dose rate exposure is of central importance in understanding the possible range of health effects from prolonged exposures to radiation. The One Million Person Study of Radiation Workers and Veterans (MPS) of low-dose health effects was designed to evaluate radiation risks among healthy American workers and veterans. The MPS is evaluating low-dose and dose-rate effects, intakes of radioactive elements, cancer and non-cancer outcomes, as well as differences in risks between women and men. Medical radiation workers make up a large group of individuals occupationally exposed to low doses of radiation from external x-ray/gamma exposures. For the MPS, about 100 000 United States medical radiation workers have been selected for study. The approach to the complex dosimetry circumstances for such workers over three to four decades of occupation were initially and broadly described in National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) Report No. 178. NCRP Commentary No. 30 provides more detail and describes an optimum approach for using personal monitoring data to estimate lung and other organ doses applicable to the cohort and provides specific precautions/considerations applicable to the dosimetry of medical radiation worker organ doses for use in epidemiologic studies. The use of protective aprons creates dosimetric complexity. It is recommended that dose values from dosimeters worn over a protective apron be reduced by a factor of 20…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free