Strengths and Weaknesses of Dosimetry Used in Studies of Low-Dose Radiation Exposure and Cancer
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Help
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

Strengths and Weaknesses of Dosimetry Used in Studies of Low-Dose Radiation Exposure and Cancer

Filetype[PDF-423.27 KB]


  • English

  • Details:

    • Alternative Title:
      J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr
    • Description:
      Background:

      A monograph systematically evaluating recent evidence on the dose-response relationship between low-dose ionizing radiation exposure and cancer risk required a critical appraisal of dosimetry methods in 26 potentially informative studies.

      Methods:

      The relevant literature included studies published in 2006–2017. Studies comprised case-control and cohort designs examining populations predominantly exposed to sparsely ionizing radiation, mostly from external sources, resulting in average doses of no more than 100 mGy. At least two dosimetrists reviewed each study and appraised the strengths and weaknesses of the dosimetry systems used, including assessment of sources and effects of dose estimation error. An overarching concern was whether dose error might cause the spurious appearance of a dose-response where none was present.

      Results:

      The review included 8 environmental, 4 medical, and 14 occupational studies that varied in properties relative to evaluation criteria. Treatment of dose estimation error also varied among studies, although few conducted a comprehensive evaluation. Six studies appeared to have known or suspected biases in dose estimates. The potential for these biases to cause a spurious dose-response association was constrained to three case-control studies that relied extensively on information gathered in interviews conducted after case ascertainment.

      Conclusions:

      The potential for spurious dose-response associations from dose information appeared limited to case-control studies vulnerable to recall errors that may be differential by case status. Otherwise, risk estimates appeared reasonably free of a substantial bias from dose estimation error. Future studies would benefit from a comprehensive evaluation of dose estimation errors, including methods accounting for their potential effects on dose-response associations.

    • Pubmed ID:
      32657346
    • Pubmed Central ID:
      PMC7667397
    • Document Type:
    • Collection(s):
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov