Effective dose: a flawed concept that could and should be replaced

被引:112
作者
Brenner, D. J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Med Ctr, Ctr Radiol Res, New York, NY 10032 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1259/bjr/22942198
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
The effective dose is designed to provide a single number proportional to the radiobiological "detriment" from a particular, often inhomogeneous, radiation exposure, with detriment representing a balance between carcinogenesis, life shortening and hereditary effects. it is commonly used to allow a comparison of the risks associated with different spatial dose distributions produced by different imaging techniques. The effective dose represents questionable science: two of the most important reasons for this are that the tissue-specific weighting factors used to calculate effective dose are a subjective mix of different endpoints, and that the marked and differing age dependencies for different endpoints are not taken into account. Importantly, the effective dose is prone to misuse, with widespread confusion between effective dose, equivalent dose and absorbed dose. it is suggested here that effective dose could and should be replaced by a new quantity that does not have these problems. An appropriate new quantity could be "effective risk", which, like effective dose, is a weighted sum of equivalent doses to different tissues; unlike effective dose, where the tissue-dependent weighting factors are a set of subjective committee-defined numbers, the weighting factors for effective risk would simply be evaluated tissue-specific lifetime cancer risks per unit equivalent dose. The resulting quantity would perform the same comparative role as effective dose; it would have the potential to be age- and, if desired, gender-specific, just as easy to estimate, less prone to misuse, more directly interpretable, and based on more defensible science.
引用
收藏
页码:521 / 523
页数:3
相关论文
共 11 条
  • [1] Amis E Stephen Jr, 2007, J Am Coll Radiol, V4, P272, DOI 10.1016/j.jacr.2007.03.002
  • [2] Current concepts - Computed tomography - An increasing source of radiation exposure
    Brenner, David J.
    Hall, Eric J.
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2007, 357 (22) : 2277 - 2284
  • [3] Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know
    Brenner, DJ
    Doll, R
    Goodhead, DT
    Hall, EJ
    Land, CE
    Little, JB
    Lubin, JH
    Preston, DL
    Preston, RJ
    Puskin, JS
    Ron, E
    Sachs, RK
    Samet, JM
    Setlow, RB
    Zaider, M
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2003, 100 (24) : 13761 - 13766
  • [4] *INT COMM RAD PROT, 1977, ICRP PUBL, V26
  • [5] Diagnostic CT scans: Assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks
    Lee, CI
    Haims, AH
    Monico, EP
    Brink, JA
    Forman, HP
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2004, 231 (02) : 393 - 398
  • [6] Effective dose: how should it be applied to medical exposures?
    Martin, C. J.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2007, 80 (956) : 639 - 647
  • [7] MARTIN CJ, 2008, RAD PROT DO IN PRESS
  • [8] National Research Council, 2006, Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2, DOI [DOI 10.17226/11340, 10.17226/11340]
  • [9] Paquet F., 2017, Annals of the ICRP, V46, P1, DOI [10.1016/j.icrp.2008.08.001, 10.1177/0146645317734963, 10.1016/j.icrp.2013.01.001]
  • [10] Solid 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.
    [J]. RADIATION RESEARCH, 2007, 168 (01) : 1 - 64