Cumulative effective dose from recurrent CT examinations in Europe: proposal for clinical guidance based on an ESR EuroSafe Imaging survey
In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern internationally. Evidence, predominantly from the USA, has shown that a significant number of patients receive a cumulative effective dose of 10...
Saved in:
Published in | European radiology Vol. 31; no. 8; pp. 5514 - 5523 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Berlin/Heidelberg
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
01.08.2021
Springer Nature B.V |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern internationally. Evidence, predominantly from the USA, has shown that a significant number of patients receive a cumulative effective dose of 100 mSv or greater. To obtain a European perspective, EuroSafe Imaging carried out a survey to collect European data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent computed tomography examinations. The survey found that a relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose equal to or higher than 100 mSv from computed tomography, most of them having an oncological disease. However, there is considerable variation between institutions as these values ranged from 0 to 2.72%, highlighting that local practice or, depending on the institution and its medical focus, local patient conditions are likely to be a significant factor in the levels of cumulative effective dose received, rather than this simply being a global phenomenon. This paper also provides some practical actions to support the management of cumulative effective dose and to refine or improve practice where recurrent examinations are required. These actions are focused around increasing awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, actions focused on optimisation where a team approach is critical, better use of modern equipment and the use of Dose Management and Clinical Decision Support Systems together with focused clinical audits. The proper use of cumulative effective dose should be part of training programmes for referrers and practitioners, including what information to give to patients.
Patient summary
Radiation is used to the benefit of patients in diagnostic procedures such as CT examinations, and in therapeutic procedures like the external radiation treatment for cancer. However, radiation is also known to increase the risk of cancer. To oversee this risk, the cumulative effective dose (CED) received by a patient from imaging procedures over his or her life is important. In this paper, the authors, on behalf of EuroSafe Imaging, report on a survey carried out in Europe that aims to estimate the proportion of patients that undergo CT examinations and are exposed to a CED of more than 100 mSv. At the same time, the survey enquires about and underlines radiologists’ measures and radiology departments’ strategies to limit such exposure. Over the period of 2015–2018, respondents reported that 0.5% (0–2.72%) of patients were exposed to a CED of ≥ 100 mSv from imaging procedures. The background radiation dose in Europe depends on the location, but it is around 2.5 mSv per year. It is obvious that patients with cancer, chronic diseases and trauma run the highest risk of having a high CED. However, even if the number of patients exposed to ≥ 100 mSv is relatively low, it is important to lower this number even further. Measures could consist in using procedures that do not necessitate radiation, using very low dose procedures, being very critical in requiring imaging procedures and increasing awareness about the issue.
Key Points
• A relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose from CT computed tomography equal to or greater than 100 mSv, in Europe, most of them having an oncological disease.
• There is a wide range in the number of patients who receive cumulative effective dose equal to or greater than 100 mSv (0–2.72%) and optimisation should be improved.
• Increasing the awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, concrete actions focused on optimisation and development of dose management systems is suggested. |
---|---|
AbstractList | In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern internationally. Evidence, predominantly from the USA, has shown that a significant number of patients receive a cumulative effective dose of 100 mSv or greater. To obtain a European perspective, EuroSafe Imaging carried out a survey to collect European data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent computed tomography examinations. The survey found that a relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose equal to or higher than 100 mSv from computed tomography, most of them having an oncological disease. However, there is considerable variation between institutions as these values ranged from 0 to 2.72%, highlighting that local practice or, depending on the institution and its medical focus, local patient conditions are likely to be a significant factor in the levels of cumulative effective dose received, rather than this simply being a global phenomenon. This paper also provides some practical actions to support the management of cumulative effective dose and to refine or improve practice where recurrent examinations are required. These actions are focused around increasing awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, actions focused on optimisation where a team approach is critical, better use of modern equipment and the use of Dose Management and Clinical Decision Support Systems together with focused clinical audits. The proper use of cumulative effective dose should be part of training programmes for referrers and practitioners, including what information to give to patients. Radiation is used to the benefit of patients in diagnostic procedures such as CT examinations, and in therapeutic procedures like the external radiation treatment for cancer. However, radiation is also known to increase the risk of cancer. To oversee this risk, the cumulative effective dose (CED) received by a patient from imaging procedures over his or her life is important. In this paper, the authors, on behalf of EuroSafe Imaging, report on a survey carried out in Europe that aims to estimate the proportion of patients that undergo CT examinations and are exposed to a CED of more than 100 mSv. At the same time, the survey enquires about and underlines radiologists' measures and radiology departments' strategies to limit such exposure. Over the period of 2015-2018, respondents reported that 0.5% (0-2.72%) of patients were exposed to a CED of ≥ 100 mSv from imaging procedures. The background radiation dose in Europe depends on the location, but it is around 2.5 mSv per year. It is obvious that patients with cancer, chronic diseases and trauma run the highest risk of having a high CED. However, even if the number of patients exposed to ≥ 100 mSv is relatively low, it is important to lower this number even further. Measures could consist in using procedures that do not necessitate radiation, using very low dose procedures, being very critical in requiring imaging procedures and increasing awareness about the issue. KEY POINTS: • A relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose from CT computed tomography equal to or greater than 100 mSv, in Europe, most of them having an oncological disease. • There is a wide range in the number of patients who receive cumulative effective dose equal to or greater than 100 mSv (0-2.72%) and optimisation should be improved. • Increasing the awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, concrete actions focused on optimisation and development of dose management systems is suggested.In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern internationally. Evidence, predominantly from the USA, has shown that a significant number of patients receive a cumulative effective dose of 100 mSv or greater. To obtain a European perspective, EuroSafe Imaging carried out a survey to collect European data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent computed tomography examinations. The survey found that a relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose equal to or higher than 100 mSv from computed tomography, most of them having an oncological disease. However, there is considerable variation between institutions as these values ranged from 0 to 2.72%, highlighting that local practice or, depending on the institution and its medical focus, local patient conditions are likely to be a significant factor in the levels of cumulative effective dose received, rather than this simply being a global phenomenon. This paper also provides some practical actions to support the management of cumulative effective dose and to refine or improve practice where recurrent examinations are required. These actions are focused around increasing awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, actions focused on optimisation where a team approach is critical, better use of modern equipment and the use of Dose Management and Clinical Decision Support Systems together with focused clinical audits. The proper use of cumulative effective dose should be part of training programmes for referrers and practitioners, including what information to give to patients. Radiation is used to the benefit of patients in diagnostic procedures such as CT examinations, and in therapeutic procedures like the external radiation treatment for cancer. However, radiation is also known to increase the risk of cancer. To oversee this risk, the cumulative effective dose (CED) received by a patient from imaging procedures over his or her life is important. In this paper, the authors, on behalf of EuroSafe Imaging, report on a survey carried out in Europe that aims to estimate the proportion of patients that undergo CT examinations and are exposed to a CED of more than 100 mSv. At the same time, the survey enquires about and underlines radiologists' measures and radiology departments' strategies to limit such exposure. Over the period of 2015-2018, respondents reported that 0.5% (0-2.72%) of patients were exposed to a CED of ≥ 100 mSv from imaging procedures. The background radiation dose in Europe depends on the location, but it is around 2.5 mSv per year. It is obvious that patients with cancer, chronic diseases and trauma run the highest risk of having a high CED. However, even if the number of patients exposed to ≥ 100 mSv is relatively low, it is important to lower this number even further. Measures could consist in using procedures that do not necessitate radiation, using very low dose procedures, being very critical in requiring imaging procedures and increasing awareness about the issue. KEY POINTS: • A relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose from CT computed tomography equal to or greater than 100 mSv, in Europe, most of them having an oncological disease. • There is a wide range in the number of patients who receive cumulative effective dose equal to or greater than 100 mSv (0-2.72%) and optimisation should be improved. • Increasing the awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, concrete actions focused on optimisation and development of dose management systems is suggested. In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern internationally. Evidence, predominantly from the USA, has shown that a significant number of patients receive a cumulative effective dose of 100 mSv or greater. To obtain a European perspective, EuroSafe Imaging carried out a survey to collect European data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent computed tomography examinations. The survey found that a relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose equal to or higher than 100 mSv from computed tomography, most of them having an oncological disease. However, there is considerable variation between institutions as these values ranged from 0 to 2.72%, highlighting that local practice or, depending on the institution and its medical focus, local patient conditions are likely to be a significant factor in the levels of cumulative effective dose received, rather than this simply being a global phenomenon. This paper also provides some practical actions to support the management of cumulative effective dose and to refine or improve practice where recurrent examinations are required. These actions are focused around increasing awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, actions focused on optimisation where a team approach is critical, better use of modern equipment and the use of Dose Management and Clinical Decision Support Systems together with focused clinical audits. The proper use of cumulative effective dose should be part of training programmes for referrers and practitioners, including what information to give to patients. Patient summary Radiation is used to the benefit of patients in diagnostic procedures such as CT examinations, and in therapeutic procedures like the external radiation treatment for cancer. However, radiation is also known to increase the risk of cancer. To oversee this risk, the cumulative effective dose (CED) received by a patient from imaging procedures over his or her life is important. In this paper, the authors, on behalf of EuroSafe Imaging, report on a survey carried out in Europe that aims to estimate the proportion of patients that undergo CT examinations and are exposed to a CED of more than 100 mSv. At the same time, the survey enquires about and underlines radiologists’ measures and radiology departments’ strategies to limit such exposure. Over the period of 2015–2018, respondents reported that 0.5% (0–2.72%) of patients were exposed to a CED of ≥ 100 mSv from imaging procedures. The background radiation dose in Europe depends on the location, but it is around 2.5 mSv per year. It is obvious that patients with cancer, chronic diseases and trauma run the highest risk of having a high CED. However, even if the number of patients exposed to ≥ 100 mSv is relatively low, it is important to lower this number even further. Measures could consist in using procedures that do not necessitate radiation, using very low dose procedures, being very critical in requiring imaging procedures and increasing awareness about the issue. Key Points • A relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose from CT computed tomography equal to or greater than 100 mSv, in Europe, most of them having an oncological disease. • There is a wide range in the number of patients who receive cumulative effective dose equal to or greater than 100 mSv (0–2.72%) and optimisation should be improved. • Increasing the awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, concrete actions focused on optimisation and development of dose management systems is suggested. In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern internationally. Evidence, predominantly from the USA, has shown that a significant number of patients receive a cumulative effective dose of 100 mSv or greater. To obtain a European perspective, EuroSafe Imaging carried out a survey to collect European data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent computed tomography examinations. The survey found that a relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose equal to or higher than 100 mSv from computed tomography, most of them having an oncological disease. However, there is considerable variation between institutions as these values ranged from 0 to 2.72%, highlighting that local practice or, depending on the institution and its medical focus, local patient conditions are likely to be a significant factor in the levels of cumulative effective dose received, rather than this simply being a global phenomenon. This paper also provides some practical actions to support the management of cumulative effective dose and to refine or improve practice where recurrent examinations are required. These actions are focused around increasing awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, actions focused on optimisation where a team approach is critical, better use of modern equipment and the use of Dose Management and Clinical Decision Support Systems together with focused clinical audits. The proper use of cumulative effective dose should be part of training programmes for referrers and practitioners, including what information to give to patients.Patient summaryRadiation is used to the benefit of patients in diagnostic procedures such as CT examinations, and in therapeutic procedures like the external radiation treatment for cancer. However, radiation is also known to increase the risk of cancer. To oversee this risk, the cumulative effective dose (CED) received by a patient from imaging procedures over his or her life is important. In this paper, the authors, on behalf of EuroSafe Imaging, report on a survey carried out in Europe that aims to estimate the proportion of patients that undergo CT examinations and are exposed to a CED of more than 100 mSv. At the same time, the survey enquires about and underlines radiologists’ measures and radiology departments’ strategies to limit such exposure. Over the period of 2015–2018, respondents reported that 0.5% (0–2.72%) of patients were exposed to a CED of ≥ 100 mSv from imaging procedures. The background radiation dose in Europe depends on the location, but it is around 2.5 mSv per year. It is obvious that patients with cancer, chronic diseases and trauma run the highest risk of having a high CED. However, even if the number of patients exposed to ≥ 100 mSv is relatively low, it is important to lower this number even further. Measures could consist in using procedures that do not necessitate radiation, using very low dose procedures, being very critical in requiring imaging procedures and increasing awareness about the issue.Key Points• A relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose from CT computed tomography equal to or greater than 100 mSv, in Europe, most of them having an oncological disease.• There is a wide range in the number of patients who receive cumulative effective dose equal to or greater than 100 mSv (0–2.72%) and optimisation should be improved.• Increasing the awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, concrete actions focused on optimisation and development of dose management systems is suggested. In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern internationally. Evidence, predominantly from the USA, has shown that a significant number of patients receive a cumulative effective dose of 100 mSv or greater. To obtain a European perspective, EuroSafe Imaging carried out a survey to collect European data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent computed tomography examinations. The survey found that a relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose equal to or higher than 100 mSv from computed tomography, most of them having an oncological disease. However, there is considerable variation between institutions as these values ranged from 0 to 2.72%, highlighting that local practice or, depending on the institution and its medical focus, local patient conditions are likely to be a significant factor in the levels of cumulative effective dose received, rather than this simply being a global phenomenon. This paper also provides some practical actions to support the management of cumulative effective dose and to refine or improve practice where recurrent examinations are required. These actions are focused around increasing awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, actions focused on optimisation where a team approach is critical, better use of modern equipment and the use of Dose Management and Clinical Decision Support Systems together with focused clinical audits. The proper use of cumulative effective dose should be part of training programmes for referrers and practitioners, including what information to give to patients. Radiation is used to the benefit of patients in diagnostic procedures such as CT examinations, and in therapeutic procedures like the external radiation treatment for cancer. However, radiation is also known to increase the risk of cancer. To oversee this risk, the cumulative effective dose (CED) received by a patient from imaging procedures over his or her life is important. In this paper, the authors, on behalf of EuroSafe Imaging, report on a survey carried out in Europe that aims to estimate the proportion of patients that undergo CT examinations and are exposed to a CED of more than 100 mSv. At the same time, the survey enquires about and underlines radiologists' measures and radiology departments' strategies to limit such exposure. Over the period of 2015-2018, respondents reported that 0.5% (0-2.72%) of patients were exposed to a CED of ≥ 100 mSv from imaging procedures. The background radiation dose in Europe depends on the location, but it is around 2.5 mSv per year. It is obvious that patients with cancer, chronic diseases and trauma run the highest risk of having a high CED. However, even if the number of patients exposed to ≥ 100 mSv is relatively low, it is important to lower this number even further. Measures could consist in using procedures that do not necessitate radiation, using very low dose procedures, being very critical in requiring imaging procedures and increasing awareness about the issue. KEY POINTS: • A relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose from CT computed tomography equal to or greater than 100 mSv, in Europe, most of them having an oncological disease. • There is a wide range in the number of patients who receive cumulative effective dose equal to or greater than 100 mSv (0-2.72%) and optimisation should be improved. • Increasing the awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, concrete actions focused on optimisation and development of dose management systems is suggested. |
Author | Paulo, Graciano Loose, Reinhard Frija, Guy Damilakis, John Vano, Eliseo |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Guy surname: Frija fullname: Frija, Guy email: guyfrija@gmail.com organization: Université de Paris – sequence: 2 givenname: John surname: Damilakis fullname: Damilakis, John organization: School of Medicine, University of Crete – sequence: 3 givenname: Graciano surname: Paulo fullname: Paulo, Graciano organization: ESTESC-Coimbra Health School, Medical Imaging and Radiotherapy Department, Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra – sequence: 4 givenname: Reinhard surname: Loose fullname: Loose, Reinhard organization: Institute of Medical Physics, Hospital Nuremberg – sequence: 5 givenname: Eliseo surname: Vano fullname: Vano, Eliseo organization: Radiology Department, Complutense University |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33710370$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp9ks9u1DAQxi1URLeFF-CALHHhEhjb2TjhgIRWBSpVQqLlbDnOOLhK7MWOV_QVeGrMbsufHnoaW_P7Rt9ovhNy5INHQp4zeM0A5JsEIARUwFkFsumaij0iK1YLXjFo6yOygk60ley6-picpHQNAB2r5RNyLIRkICSsyM9NnvOkF7dDitai2b-GkJDaGGYa0eQY0S90c0Xxh56dL3DwiTpPz3IMW3xLt6WEpCdqQ6Rmct6Z8hmzG7Q3SHudcKDBU10kl1_2skttkZ7PenR-pCnHHd48JY-tnhI-u62n5OuHs6vNp-ri88fzzfuLytSyXqoaGy54b2VvmMFWM94PXdMKW4NuUDK-1gxta62BXoPuuJUts6UDwA1YLU7Ju8Pcbe5nHExZLupJbaObdbxRQTv1f8e7b2oMO9VyCbITZcCr2wExfM-YFjW7ZHCatMeQk-JrKC7qddMV9OU99Drk6Mt6haq7VkjZQqFe_Ovoj5W7MxWgPQAmhpQiWmXcsr9DMegmxUD9ToQ6JEKVRKh9IhQrUn5Pejf9QZE4iFKB_Yjxr-0HVL8AIrvK2w |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_radi_2024_10_019 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00247_023_05638_1 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_022_08557_1 crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20219004 crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6498_acf6ca crossref_primary_10_1016_j_radphyschem_2022_110653 crossref_primary_10_1097_RLI_0000000000001111 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_024_11161_0 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13244_024_01765_x crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20210478 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_023_10076_6 crossref_primary_10_1097_RLI_0000000000001151 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_apradiso_2022_110452 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_024_10659_x crossref_primary_10_1016_j_apradiso_2024_111440 crossref_primary_10_3390_biomedicines12030600 crossref_primary_10_3390_ijms25137064 crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6498_abffc5 crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20230106 crossref_primary_10_1667_RADE_21_00203_1 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejro_2022_100470 crossref_primary_10_1002_jmrs_811 crossref_primary_10_3892_etm_2022_11461 crossref_primary_10_1051_radiopro_2021011 crossref_primary_10_1002_acm2_70022 crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6498_ad8ce6 crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6498_acdd7e crossref_primary_10_3390_diagnostics13010020 crossref_primary_10_3390_life12121983 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_023_10161_w crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_023_10520_7 crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20210444 crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20210543 crossref_primary_10_3389_fonc_2022_798460 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_023_10299_7 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_024_11240_2 crossref_primary_10_1088_1361_6560_ad3886 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13244_021_01041_2 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_radi_2025_01_018 crossref_primary_10_1051_radiopro_2022015 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_radphyschem_2023_111460 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejrad_2024_111340 |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.11.007 10.1007/s11547-014-0485-x 10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.10.025 10.1016/j.ejmp.2013.12.005 10.1088/0952-4746/34/1/E1 10.2214/AJR.19.21511 10.1007/s00330-019-06551-8 10.1093/ndt/gfs145 10.1016/j.jacr.2012.03.003 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.11.013 10.1007/s00330-019-06528-7 10.1007/s00330-019-06523-y 10.1088/1361-6498/ab7fbb 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.07.079 10.26044/esi2020/ESI-11078 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | The Author(s) 2021 The Author(s) 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. 2021. The Author(s). |
Copyright_xml | – notice: The Author(s) 2021 – notice: The Author(s) 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. – notice: 2021. The Author(s). |
CorporateAuthor | European Society of Radiology (ESR) |
CorporateAuthor_xml | – name: European Society of Radiology (ESR) |
DBID | C6C AAYXX CITATION NPM 3V. 7QO 7RV 7X7 7XB 88E 8AO 8FD 8FE 8FG 8FH 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA ARAPS AZQEC BBNVY BENPR BGLVJ BHPHI CCPQU DWQXO FR3 FYUFA GHDGH GNUQQ HCIFZ K9. KB0 LK8 M0S M1P M7P NAPCQ P5Z P62 P64 PHGZM PHGZT PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQGLB PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS 7X8 5PM |
DOI | 10.1007/s00330-021-07696-1 |
DatabaseName | Springer Nature OA Free Journals CrossRef PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Biotechnology Research Abstracts Nursing & Allied Health Database Health & Medical Collection (Proquest) ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Medical Database (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Pharma Collection Technology Research Database ProQuest SciTech Collection ProQuest Technology Collection ProQuest Natural Science Journals ProQuest Hospital Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection ProQuest Central Essentials Biological Science Collection ProQuest Central Technology Collection Natural Science Collection ProQuest One ProQuest Central Korea Engineering Research Database Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Central Student SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition) Biological Sciences ProQuest Health & Medical Collection Medical Database ProQuest Biological Science Database (Proquest) Nursing & Allied Health Premium Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Central China MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef PubMed ProQuest Central Student Technology Collection Technology Research Database ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) SciTech Premium Collection ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest Natural Science Collection ProQuest Pharma Collection ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection Health Research Premium Collection Biotechnology Research Abstracts Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) Natural Science Collection ProQuest Central Korea Health & Medical Research Collection Biological Science Collection ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni) Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection ProQuest Biological Science Collection ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source ProQuest Hospital Collection ProQuest Technology Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) Biological Science Database ProQuest SciTech Collection ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database Nursing & Allied Health Premium ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source (Alumni) Engineering Research Database ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic ProQuest Central Student PubMed |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: C6C name: Springer Nature OA Free Journals url: http://www.springeropen.com/ sourceTypes: Publisher – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: 8FG name: ProQuest Technology Collection url: https://search.proquest.com/technologycollection1 sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 1432-1084 |
EndPage | 5523 |
ExternalDocumentID | PMC8270793 33710370 10_1007_s00330_021_07696_1 |
Genre | Journal Article |
GeographicLocations | Europe |
GeographicLocations_xml | – name: Europe |
GroupedDBID | --- -53 -5E -5G -BR -EM -Y2 -~C .86 .VR 04C 06C 06D 0R~ 0VY 1N0 1SB 2.D 203 28- 29G 29~ 2J2 2JN 2JY 2KG 2KM 2LR 2P1 2VQ 2~H 30V 36B 3V. 4.4 406 408 409 40D 40E 53G 5GY 5QI 5VS 67Z 6NX 6PF 7RV 7X7 88E 8AO 8FE 8FG 8FH 8FI 8FJ 8TC 8UJ 95- 95. 95~ 96X AAAVM AABHQ AACDK AAHNG AAIAL AAJBT AAJKR AANXM AANZL AARHV AARTL AASML AATNV AATVU AAUYE AAWCG AAWTL AAYIU AAYQN AAYTO AAYZH ABAKF ABBBX ABBXA ABDZT ABECU ABFTV ABHLI ABHQN ABIPD ABJNI ABJOX ABKCH ABKTR ABMNI ABMQK ABNWP ABPLI ABQBU ABQSL ABSXP ABTEG ABTKH ABTMW ABULA ABUWG ABUWZ ABWNU ABXPI ACAOD ACBXY ACDTI ACGFO ACGFS ACHSB ACHVE ACHXU ACIHN ACIWK ACKNC ACMDZ ACMLO ACOKC ACOMO ACPIV ACPRK ACREN ACUDM ACZOJ ADBBV ADHHG ADHIR ADIMF ADINQ ADJJI ADKNI ADKPE ADOJX ADRFC ADTPH ADURQ ADYFF ADYOE ADZKW AEAQA AEBTG AEFIE AEFQL AEGAL AEGNC AEJHL AEJRE AEKMD AEMSY AENEX AEOHA AEPYU AESKC AETLH AEVLU AEXYK AFBBN AFEXP AFJLC AFKRA AFLOW AFQWF AFRAH AFWTZ AFYQB AFZKB AGAYW AGDGC AGGDS AGJBK AGMZJ AGQEE AGQMX AGRTI AGVAE AGWIL AGWZB AGYKE AHAVH AHBYD AHIZS AHKAY AHMBA AHSBF AHYZX AIAKS AIGIU AIIXL AILAN AITGF AJBLW AJRNO AJZVZ AKMHD ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALWAN AMKLP AMTXH AMXSW AMYLF AMYQR AOCGG ARAPS ARMRJ ASPBG AVWKF AXYYD AZFZN B-. BA0 BBNVY BBWZM BDATZ BENPR BGLVJ BGNMA BHPHI BKEYQ BMSDO BPHCQ BSONS BVXVI C6C CAG CCPQU COF CS3 CSCUP DDRTE DL5 DNIVK DPUIP DU5 EBD EBLON EBS ECF ECT EIHBH EIOEI EJD EMB EMOBN EN4 ESBYG EX3 F5P FEDTE FERAY FFXSO FIGPU FINBP FNLPD FRRFC FSGXE FWDCC FYUFA G-Y G-Z GGCAI GGRSB GJIRD GNWQR GQ6 GQ7 GQ8 GRRUI GXS H13 HCIFZ HF~ HG5 HG6 HMCUK HMJXF HQYDN HRMNR HVGLF HZ~ I-F I09 IHE IJ- IKXTQ IMOTQ IWAJR IXC IXD IXE IZIGR IZQ I~X I~Z J-C J0Z JBSCW JCJTX JZLTJ KDC KOV KOW KPH LAS LK8 LLZTM M1P M4Y M7P MA- N2Q N9A NAPCQ NB0 NDZJH NPVJJ NQJWS NU0 O9- O93 O9G O9I O9J OAM OVD P19 P2P P62 P9S PF0 PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO PT4 PT5 Q2X QOK QOR QOS R4E R89 R9I RHV RIG RNI RNS ROL RPX RRX RSV RZK S16 S1Z S26 S27 S28 S37 S3B SAP SCLPG SDE SDH SDM SHX SISQX SJYHP SMD SNE SNPRN SNX SOHCF SOJ SPISZ SRMVM SSLCW SSXJD STPWE SV3 SZ9 SZN T13 T16 TEORI TSG TSK TSV TT1 TUC U2A U9L UDS UG4 UKHRP UOJIU UTJUX UZXMN VC2 VFIZW W23 W48 WJK WK8 WOW YLTOR Z45 Z7R Z7U Z7X Z7Y Z7Z Z82 Z83 Z85 Z87 Z88 Z8M Z8O Z8R Z8S Z8T Z8V Z8W Z8Z Z91 Z92 ZMTXR ZOVNA ~EX AAPKM AAYXX ABBRH ABDBE ABFSG ACMFV ACSTC ADHKG ADKFA AEZWR AFDZB AFHIU AFOHR AGQPQ AHPBZ AHWEU AIXLP ATHPR AYFIA CITATION PHGZM PHGZT NPM 7QO 7XB 8FD 8FK ABRTQ AZQEC DWQXO FR3 GNUQQ K9. P64 PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQGLB PQUKI PRINS 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-4e6232bf7bc1ce8a12bd9683f40a6e7125a1ef8ffc0ba0a92f781f6e7002c0fa3 |
IEDL.DBID | C6C |
ISSN | 0938-7994 1432-1084 |
IngestDate | Thu Aug 21 18:31:25 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 06:29:04 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 25 19:09:03 EDT 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:28:23 EST 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:08:22 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 03:08:22 EDT 2025 Fri Feb 21 02:48:25 EST 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 8 |
Keywords | Clinical audit Radiation exposure Surveys and questionnaires X-ray computed tomography Clinical decision support systems |
Language | English |
License | Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c474t-4e6232bf7bc1ce8a12bd9683f40a6e7125a1ef8ffc0ba0a92f781f6e7002c0fa3 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
OpenAccessLink | https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07696-1 |
PMID | 33710370 |
PQID | 2549837780 |
PQPubID | 54162 |
PageCount | 10 |
ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8270793 proquest_miscellaneous_2501254569 proquest_journals_2549837780 pubmed_primary_33710370 crossref_citationtrail_10_1007_s00330_021_07696_1 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_021_07696_1 springer_journals_10_1007_s00330_021_07696_1 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2021-08-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2021-08-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 08 year: 2021 text: 2021-08-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | Berlin/Heidelberg |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Berlin/Heidelberg – name: Germany – name: Heidelberg |
PublicationTitle | European radiology |
PublicationTitleAbbrev | Eur Radiol |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Eur Radiol |
PublicationYear | 2021 |
Publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg Springer Nature B.V |
Publisher_xml | – name: Springer Berlin Heidelberg – name: Springer Nature B.V |
References | Walsh, Shore, Auvinen, Jung, Wakeford (CR4) 2014; 34 Palen, Sharpe, Shetterly, Steiner (CR20) 2019; 213 Brambilla, De Mauri, Lizio (CR23) 2014; 30 Desmond, McWilliams, Maher, Shanahan, Quigley (CR14) 2012; 10 CR6 Moriarity, Klochko, Obrien, Halabi (CR19) 2015; 12 CR18 De Mauri, Brambilla, Izzo (CR13) 2012; 27 CR17 CR9 Vano (CR5) 2020; 40 CR24 Brambilla, Cerini, Lizio, Vigna, Carriero, Fossaceca (CR15) 2015; 120 Smith-Bindman, Wang, Chu (CR8) 2019; 364 CR22 Rehani, Yang, Melick (CR2) 2019; 30 Durand, Dixon, Morin (CR3) 2012; 9 CR21 Eisenhauer, Therasse, Bogaerts (CR10) 2009; 45 Brambilla, Vassileva, Kuchcinska, Rehani (CR1) 2020; 30 (CR7) 2019 Manning, O’Neill, Haider, Colgan, Madhavan, Moore (CR16) 2009; 49 Rehani, Melick, Alvi (CR11) 2020; 30 Brambilla, De Mauri, Leva, Carriero, Picano (CR12) 2013; 126 L Walsh (7696_CR4) 2014; 34 7696_CR24 DJ Durand (7696_CR3) 2012; 9 EA Eisenhauer (7696_CR10) 2009; 45 7696_CR22 R Smith-Bindman (7696_CR8) 2019; 364 AN Desmond (7696_CR14) 2012; 10 E Vano (7696_CR5) 2020; 40 TE Palen (7696_CR20) 2019; 213 7696_CR21 M Brambilla (7696_CR15) 2015; 120 M Brambilla (7696_CR1) 2020; 30 AK Moriarity (7696_CR19) 2015; 12 7696_CR17 7696_CR18 BJ Manning (7696_CR16) 2009; 49 A De Mauri (7696_CR13) 2012; 27 MM Rehani (7696_CR2) 2019; 30 MM Rehani (7696_CR11) 2020; 30 M Brambilla (7696_CR23) 2014; 30 National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (7696_CR7) 2019 7696_CR9 7696_CR6 M Brambilla (7696_CR12) 2013; 126 |
References_xml | – volume: 10 start-page: 259 year: 2012 end-page: 265 ident: CR14 article-title: Radiation exposure from diagnostic imaging among patients with gastrointestinal disorders publication-title: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.11.007 – volume: 120 start-page: 563 year: 2015 end-page: 570 ident: CR15 article-title: Cumulative radiation dose and radiation risk from medical imaging in patients subjected to endovascular aortic aneurysm repair publication-title: Radiol Med doi: 10.1007/s11547-014-0485-x – ident: CR21 – ident: CR22 – ident: CR18 – volume: 126 start-page: 480 year: 2013 end-page: 486 ident: CR12 article-title: Cumulative radiation dose from medical imaging in chronic adult patients publication-title: Am J Med doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.10.025 – volume: 30 start-page: 403 year: 2014 end-page: 412 ident: CR23 article-title: Cumulative radiation dose estimates from medical imaging in paediatric patients with non-oncologic chronic illnesses. A systematic review publication-title: Phys Med doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2013.12.005 – ident: CR17 – volume: 34 start-page: E1 year: 2014 end-page: E5 ident: CR4 article-title: Risks from CT scans–what do recent studies tell us? publication-title: J Radiol Prot doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/34/1/E1 – year: 2019 ident: CR7 publication-title: Medical radiation exposure of patients in the United States, NCRP report 184 – ident: CR9 – volume: 213 start-page: 1015 year: 2019 end-page: 1020 ident: CR20 article-title: Randomized clinical trial of a clinical decision support tool for improving the appropriateness scores for ordering imaging studies in primary and specialty care ambulatory clinics publication-title: AJR Am J Roentgenol doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.21511 – volume: 30 start-page: 1839 issue: 4 year: 2020 end-page: 1846 ident: CR11 article-title: Patients undergoing recurrent CT exams: assessment of patients with non-malignant diseases, reasons for imaging and imaging appropriateness publication-title: Eur Radiol doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06551-8 – volume: 27 start-page: 3645 year: 2012 end-page: 3651 ident: CR13 article-title: Cumulative radiation dose from medical imaging in kidney transplant patients publication-title: Nephrol Dial Transplant doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfs145 – ident: CR6 – volume: 364 start-page: k493 year: 2019 ident: CR8 article-title: International variation in radiation dose for computed tomography examinations: prospective cohort study publication-title: BMJ – volume: 9 start-page: 480 issue: 7 year: 2012 end-page: 485 ident: CR3 article-title: Utilization strategies for cumulative dose estimates: a review and rational assessment publication-title: J Am Coll Radiol doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2012.03.003 – volume: 45 start-page: 228 year: 2009 end-page: 247 ident: CR10 article-title: New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1) publication-title: Eur J Cancer doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026 – volume: 12 start-page: 358 issue: 4 year: 2015 end-page: 363 ident: CR19 article-title: The effect of clinical decision support for advanced inpatient imaging publication-title: J Am Coll Radiol doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.11.013 – volume: 30 start-page: 2493 year: 2020 end-page: 2501 ident: CR1 article-title: Multinational data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent radiological procedures: call for action publication-title: Eur Radiol doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06528-7 – volume: 30 start-page: 1828 year: 2019 end-page: 1836 ident: CR2 article-title: Patients undergoing recurrent CT scans: assessing the magnitude publication-title: Eur Radiol doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06523-y – volume: 40 start-page: E14 issue: 2 year: 2020 end-page: E17 ident: CR5 article-title: Recurrent imaging procedures with ionising radiation on the same patient. Should we pay more attention? publication-title: J Radiol Prot doi: 10.1088/1361-6498/ab7fbb – volume: 49 start-page: 60 year: 2009 end-page: 65 ident: CR16 article-title: Duplex ultrasound in aneurysm surveillance following endovascular aneurysm repair: a comparison with computed tomography aortography publication-title: J Vasc Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.07.079 – ident: CR24 – ident: 7696_CR6 – volume: 120 start-page: 563 year: 2015 ident: 7696_CR15 publication-title: Radiol Med doi: 10.1007/s11547-014-0485-x – volume: 27 start-page: 3645 year: 2012 ident: 7696_CR13 publication-title: Nephrol Dial Transplant doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfs145 – volume: 10 start-page: 259 year: 2012 ident: 7696_CR14 publication-title: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.11.007 – volume: 30 start-page: 2493 year: 2020 ident: 7696_CR1 publication-title: Eur Radiol doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06528-7 – volume: 364 start-page: k493 year: 2019 ident: 7696_CR8 publication-title: BMJ – volume: 9 start-page: 480 issue: 7 year: 2012 ident: 7696_CR3 publication-title: J Am Coll Radiol doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2012.03.003 – ident: 7696_CR21 doi: 10.26044/esi2020/ESI-11078 – volume: 30 start-page: 1828 year: 2019 ident: 7696_CR2 publication-title: Eur Radiol doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06523-y – volume: 30 start-page: 1839 issue: 4 year: 2020 ident: 7696_CR11 publication-title: Eur Radiol doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06551-8 – ident: 7696_CR22 – ident: 7696_CR9 – ident: 7696_CR24 – volume: 12 start-page: 358 issue: 4 year: 2015 ident: 7696_CR19 publication-title: J Am Coll Radiol doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.11.013 – volume: 45 start-page: 228 year: 2009 ident: 7696_CR10 publication-title: Eur J Cancer doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026 – volume: 34 start-page: E1 year: 2014 ident: 7696_CR4 publication-title: J Radiol Prot doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/34/1/E1 – volume: 213 start-page: 1015 year: 2019 ident: 7696_CR20 publication-title: AJR Am J Roentgenol doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.21511 – volume-title: Medical radiation exposure of patients in the United States, NCRP report 184 year: 2019 ident: 7696_CR7 – volume: 49 start-page: 60 year: 2009 ident: 7696_CR16 publication-title: J Vasc Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.07.079 – volume: 126 start-page: 480 year: 2013 ident: 7696_CR12 publication-title: Am J Med doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.10.025 – volume: 30 start-page: 403 year: 2014 ident: 7696_CR23 publication-title: Phys Med doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2013.12.005 – volume: 40 start-page: E14 issue: 2 year: 2020 ident: 7696_CR5 publication-title: J Radiol Prot doi: 10.1088/1361-6498/ab7fbb – ident: 7696_CR17 – ident: 7696_CR18 |
SSID | ssj0009147 |
Score | 2.538469 |
Snippet | In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern... |
SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref springer |
SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
StartPage | 5514 |
SubjectTerms | Artificial intelligence Background radiation Cancer Computed Tomography Decision support systems Diagnostic Radiology Exposure Health risks Imaging Internal Medicine Interventional Radiology Management systems Medical imaging Medicine Medicine & Public Health Neuroradiology Optimization Patients Physicians Polls & surveys Radiation Radiation dosage Radiation effects Radiology Risk System effectiveness Tomography Trauma Ultrasound |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: Health & Medical Collection (Proquest) dbid: 7X7 link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV1Nb9QwEB1BkRAXxDcpBRmJG1jEiTeOuSC0oipI5UBbaW-R7dh0JZosm01V_gK_Go_jZLVU9BbJdhxnxvZ4PPMewBtupLfbHKP-8JNRrhmnUpmM6txJ5oTVUmE28vG34uiMf13MFtHh1sWwynFNDAt13Rr0kb_Hg4x_nyjTj6tfFFmj8HY1UmjchjsIXYZaLRZiC7rLAsGYP7SXVEjJY9JMSJ1DErOUYoCCP8nLgrLdjematXk9aPKfm9OwIR0-gPvRkiSfBtE_hFu2eQR3j-Nd-WP4M-8vAjfXpSVD1AY-1W1nCeaUkDV62hGbicxPib1SGBMTlJAsGzI46T-QFZIodL4bb9uSMYuS_OiXNWoLwT2wJm1DlG9y8j00O1HOki8Xgf2IdP360v5-AmeHn0_nRzQyL1DDBd9Qbr1VlGkntGHGloplupZFmTueqsIKbxQpZl3pnEm1SpXMnCiZ8yV-fTWpU_lT2Gvaxj4HwpSbcZtKXUjNjeZK50Uh3IwJ5rJcuQTY-NsrE2HJkR3jZzUBKgdRVV5UVRBVxRJ4O7VZDaAcN9Y-GKVZxQnaVVt1SuD1VOynFt6XqMa2PdbxuzdamDKBZ4Pwp-7yXGCGpW8tdtRiqoCw3bslzfI8wHeXWUAlTODdqEDbz_r_KPZvHsULuJcFZcbQxAPY26x7-9KbSxv9KsyJv_QPErc priority: 102 providerName: ProQuest |
Title | Cumulative effective dose from recurrent CT examinations in Europe: proposal for clinical guidance based on an ESR EuroSafe Imaging survey |
URI | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00330-021-07696-1 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33710370 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2549837780 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2501254569 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC8270793 |
Volume | 31 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlV1fb9MwELdgkxAviP8ERmUk3sBSnLhxzFsbtRugVWhbpfIU2a49KrF0apsJvgKfmjsnzdQNkHixI9mOk9w5d2ff_Y6Qt8Iq0Ns8Z2D8JEwYLpjSNmEm9Yp76YzSGI18PMmOpuLTrD9rYXIwFubG-T2CfYLFzdCRACxulTGwdPb7PJWYpqHIimuAXR6SiYGBnjOplGgDZP58j10hdEuzvO0geeOUNAif8UPyoNUa6aAh8yNyx1WPyb3j9lz8CflV1BchD9eVo42HBl7Nl2tHMX6ErnBXHXGYaHFG3Q-N_i-B4eiios2G_Ad6iQkT1jAN6LF0GzFJz-vFHDmDoryb02VFNQw5PQnDTrV39ONFyHRE1_Xqyv18Sqbj0VlxxNosC8wKKTZMONCAEuOlsdy6XPPEzFWWp17EOnMSFCDNnc-9t7HRsVaJlzn30AL_Uht7nT4je9Wyci8I5dr3hYuVyZQR1ght0iyTvs8l90mqfUT49rOXtoUgx0wY38sOPDmQqgRSlYFUJY_Iu27MZQPA8c_eB1tqlu1iXJdoAwMryjyOyJuuGZYRno3oyi1r7AOSGrVJFZHnDfG76dJUYjQljJY7bNF1QIju3ZZq8S1AdedJQCCMyPstA10_1t_f4uX_dX9F7ieBudEt8YDsbVa1ew2q0sb0yF05k1Dm48Me2R-Mh8MJ1odfP4-gHo4mX056YR1BOU0GvwGFbRK2 |
linkProvider | Springer Nature |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lb9QwELZKkYAL4k2ggJHgBBax441jJITQwrJLuz3QrdRbsBMbVqLJstkU-hf4MfxGPM5jtVT01lskPxJnxjNjz-ND6BnPpLPbLCXu8MMI15QTqTJGdGQltcJoqSAbebofjw_5p6PB0Rb60-XCQFhlJxO9oM7LDO7IX8FBxs0nkvDt4gcB1CjwrnYQGg1b7JrTn-7IVr2ZvHf0fc7Y6MNsOCYtqgDJuOArwo3T-ExboTOamURRpnMZJ5HloYqNcApfUWMTa7NQq1BJZkVCrWtxsiMLrYrcvJfQZR45TQ6Z6aOP6yK_1AOahdIJESElb5N0fKoegKaFBAIiQhHLmNBNRXjGuj0bpPmPp9YrwNENdL21XPG7htVuoi1T3EJXpq1v_jb6PayPPRbYicFNlAg85WVlMOSw4CXc7EMtKDycYfNLQQyOZ3o8L3DjFHiNFwDaULnXOFsad1mb-Gs9z4E7MejcHJcFVm7IwWc_7EBZgyfHHm0JV_XyxJzeQYcXQpO7aLsoC3MfYarsgJtQ6lhqnmmudBTHwg6ooJZFygaIdr89zdoy6IDG8T3tCzh7UqWOVKknVUoD9KIfs2iKgJzbe6ejZtoKhCpds2-AnvbNbiuDf0YVpqyhj7MWwKKVAbrXEL9_XRQJyOh0o8UGW_QdoEz4Zksx_-bLhSfMV0EM0MuOgdaf9f9VPDh_FU_Q1fFsupfuTfZ3H6JrzDM2hEXuoO3VsjaPnKm20o_9_sDoy0VvyL-_QlC9 |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1bb9MwFD4anTTxgrgTGGAkeIJoceLGMRJC0K1aGaumXaS9BTuxoRJLStsM9hf4Sfw6fJxLVSb2trdItnM7V_tcPoCXLBPWbzPUt5uf0GeKMl_ILPRVZAQ1XCshsRp5fxzvnrBPp_3TNfjT1sJgWmWrE52izssMz8i3cCNj78eTYMs0aREH28P30x8-IkhhpLWF06hZZE9f_LTbt_m70bal9aswHO4cD3b9BmHAzxhnC59pa_1DZbjKaKYTSUOViziJDAtkrLk1_pJqkxiTBUoGUoSGJ9TYEatHssDIyN73Bqxz3BX1YP3jzvjgcNnylzp4s0BYlcKFYE3JjivcQwi1wMf0iIDHIvbpqlm85OteTtn8J27rzOHwNtxq_FjyoWa8O7Cmi7uwsd9E6u_B70F15pDBzjWpc0bwKi_nmmBFC5nhOT92hiKDY6J_SczIcSJAJgWpQwRvyRQhHOb2MdazJm0NJ_laTXLkVYIWOCdlQaRdcnTolh1Jo8nozGEvkXk1O9cX9-HkWqjyAHpFWehHQKg0faYDoWKhWKaYVFEcc9OnnJowksYD2v72NGuaoiM2x_e0a-fsSJVaUqWOVCn14HW3Zlq3BLly9mZLzbRRD_N0ycwevOiGrWBjtEYWuqxwjvUd0L8VHjysid89Loo41nfa1XyFLboJ2DR8daSYfHPNw5PQ9UT04E3LQMvX-v9XPL76K57DhhXG9PNovPcEboaOrzFHchN6i1mln1q_baGeNQJC4Mt1y-RfC9RWTw |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cumulative+effective+dose+from+recurrent+CT+examinations+in+Europe%3A+proposal+for+clinical+guidance+based+on+an+ESR+EuroSafe+Imaging+survey&rft.jtitle=European+radiology&rft.au=Frija%2C+Guy&rft.au=Damilakis%2C+John&rft.au=Paulo%2C+Graciano&rft.au=Loose%2C+Reinhard&rft.date=2021-08-01&rft.issn=1432-1084&rft.eissn=1432-1084&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=5514&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs00330-021-07696-1&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0938-7994&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0938-7994&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0938-7994&client=summon |