scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers by "John Harrison published in 2023"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) defines effective dose in relation to a nominal value of stochastic detriment following low-level exposure of 5.7 × 10−2 Sv−1, as an average over both sexes, all ages, and two fixed composite populations (Asian and Euro-American).
Abstract: The consideration of risks from medical diagnostic x-ray examinations and their justification commonly relies on estimates of effective dose, although the quantity is actually a health-detriment-weighted summation of organ/tissue-absorbed doses rather than a measure of risk. In its 2007 Recommendations, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) defines effective dose in relation to a nominal value of stochastic detriment following low-level exposure of 5.7 × 10−2 Sv−1, as an average over both sexes, all ages, and two fixed composite populations (Asian and Euro-American). Effective dose represents the overall (whole-body) dose received by a person from a particular exposure, which can be used for the purposes of radiological protection as set out by ICRP, but it does not provide a measure that is specific to the characteristics of the exposed individual. However, the cancer incidence risk models used by ICRP can be used to provide estimates of risk separately for males and females, as a function of age-at-exposure, and for the two composite populations. Here, these organ/tissue-specific risk models are applied to estimates of organ/tissue-specific absorbed doses from a range of diagnostic procedures to derive lifetime excess cancer incidence risk estimates; the degree of heterogeneity in the distribution of absorbed doses between organs/tissues will depend on the procedure. Depending on the organs/tissues exposed, risks are generally higher in females and notably higher for younger ages-at-exposure. Comparing lifetime cancer incidence risks per Sv effective dose from the different procedures shows that overall risks are higher by about a factor of two to three for the youngest age-at-exposure group, 0–9 yr, than for 30–39 yr adults, and lower by a similar factor for an age-at-exposure of 60–69 yr. Taking into account these differences in risk per Sv, and noting the substantial uncertainties associated with risk estimates, effective dose as currently formulated provides a reasonable basis for assessing the potential risks from medical diagnostic examinations.

3 citations