↓ Skip to main content

Tracking patient radiation exposure: Challenges to integrating nuclear medicine with other modalities

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Tracking patient radiation exposure: Challenges to integrating nuclear medicine with other modalities
Published in
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, October 2012
DOI 10.1007/s12350-012-9586-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mathew Mercuri, Madan M. Rehani, Andrew J. Einstein

Abstract

The cumulative radiation exposure to the patient from multiple radiological procedures can place some individuals at significantly increased risk for stochastic effects and tissue reactions. Approaches, such as those in the International Atomic Energy Agency's Smart Card program, have been developed to track cumulative radiation exposures to individuals. These strategies often rely on the availability of structured dose reports, typically found in the DICOM header. Dosimetry information is currently readily available for many individual x-ray-based procedures. Nuclear medicine, of which nuclear cardiology constitutes the majority of the radiation burden in the US, currently lags behind x-ray-based procedures with respect to reporting of radiation dosimetric information. This article discusses qualitative differences between nuclear medicine and x-ray-based procedures, including differences in the radiation source and measurement of its strength, the impact of biokinetics on dosimetry, and the capability of current scanners to record dosimetry information. These differences create challenges in applying, monitoring, and reporting strategies used in x-ray-based procedures to nuclear medicine, and integrating dosimetry information across modalities. A concerted effort by the medical imaging community, dosimetry specialists, and manufacturers of imaging equipment is required to develop strategies to improve the reporting of radiation dosimetry data in nuclear medicine. Some ideas on how to address this issue are suggested.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Professor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 33%
Physics and Astronomy 5 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Computer Science 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 8 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 February 2022.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#579
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,995
of 190,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#3
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
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 190,995 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.