| Title |
Comparison of Patient Skin Dose Evaluated Using Radiochromic Film and Dose Calculation Software
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00270-018-1888-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Florian Magnier, Maxime Poulin, Claire Van Ngoc Ty, Estelle Osmond, Guillaume Bonniaud, Jeremy Coulot, Bruno Pereira, Louis Boyer, Joel Guersen, Lucie Cassagnes |
| Abstract |
To compare, in an interventional radiology setting, peak skin doses (PSDs) delivered as calculated using a dedicated software tool and as measured using radiochromic film. To assess the utility of this dose calculation software tool in routine clinical practice. First, radiochromic films were positioned on the examination table in the back of an adult anthropomorphic phantom to measure PSD, and X-ray examinations were simulated. Then, films were again positioned in the patient's back for 59 thoracic or abdominopelvic endovascular interventions. The results obtained with the radiochromic films were taken as a reference and were statistically compared with those of the software. With measured PSDs ranging from 100 to 7000 mGy, the median software-film difference was 8.5%. Lin's concordance coefficient was 0.98 [0.97; 0.99] (p < 0.001), meaning that concordance was excellent between the two methods. For the films where PSD exceeded 1000 mGy, the median difference in the measured value was 8.7% [- 1.3; 21.1], with a maximum discrepancy of 34%. Lin's concordance coefficient was 0.98 [0.96; 1] (p < 0.001), meaning that concordance was excellent between the two methods. Comparison between radiochromic films and the software tool showed that the software is a suitable tool for a simple and reliable estimation of PSD. The software seems to be a good alternative to films, whose use remains complex. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Physics and Astronomy | 6 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2018.
All research outputs
#14,354,487
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
#1,399
of 2,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,093
of 438,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
#34
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,401 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,141 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.