You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
CT overexposure due to incorrect scan length
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1111/1754-9485.12339 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohamed Khaldoun Badawy, Michael Galea, Kam Shan Mong, Paul U |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to raise awareness around the increased effective dose as scan length chosen is increased from standard protocol METHODS: The Monte Carlo-based software CT-Expo (G. Stamm (Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany) and H.D. Nagel (SASCRAD, Buchholz, Germany)) was used to simulate the effective dose increase as the scanned region of the standard protocol increased. The results of this study show that for scans with a high computed tomography dose index (CTDI)vol the patient could be exposed to an extra 1 mSv within 6 cm of overscan. Protocols that investigated large scan areas may not see a significant relative dose reduction because of the use of a lower CTDIvol ; however, radiation exposure should be kept as low as reasonably achievable. There is significant dose optimisation potential when strictly adhering to appropriate scan lengths within each imaging protocol wherever possible. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 19% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 7 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 15% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 January 2016.
All research outputs
#17,283,763
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology
#810
of 1,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,000
of 276,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology
#15
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,154 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 276,407 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.