Donald P. Frush, Armin Ansari, James A. Brink, Ourania Kosti, David B. Larson, Martha S. Linet, Mahadevappa Mahesh, Ioannis Sechopoulos, Jenia Vassileva
{"title":"Expert panel on monitoring radiation doses from recurrent medical diagnostic procedures: Sixth Gilbert W. Beebe Webinar","authors":"Donald P. Frush, Armin Ansari, James A. Brink, Ourania Kosti, David B. Larson, Martha S. Linet, Mahadevappa Mahesh, Ioannis Sechopoulos, Jenia Vassileva","doi":"10.1002/acm2.70022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Recurrent imaging is an essential tool for patient care but with an attendant dose from radiation exposure. Recurrent imaging has been the subject of increasing scrutiny and debate based largely on the risk from increasing cumulative doses. However, the accountability for and actions with recurrent imaging as a special component in the general construct of radiation protection in medicine is unclear. This is demonstrated by the perspectives provided by the various imaging community experts. Some perspectives may be different, but many share a common ground. Understanding these various perspectives illustrates the wide-ranging optics in considering benefits and costs in the recurrent imaging paradigm and, moreover, the value in pursuing multi-stakeholder-derived harmonization for recurrent imaging and radiation dose. This move towards consensus would be to the benefit of the imaging community, referrers, and other related healthcare professionals, as well as patients, their caregivers, and the public.</p>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":"26 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.70022","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.70022","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Recurrent imaging is an essential tool for patient care but with an attendant dose from radiation exposure. Recurrent imaging has been the subject of increasing scrutiny and debate based largely on the risk from increasing cumulative doses. However, the accountability for and actions with recurrent imaging as a special component in the general construct of radiation protection in medicine is unclear. This is demonstrated by the perspectives provided by the various imaging community experts. Some perspectives may be different, but many share a common ground. Understanding these various perspectives illustrates the wide-ranging optics in considering benefits and costs in the recurrent imaging paradigm and, moreover, the value in pursuing multi-stakeholder-derived harmonization for recurrent imaging and radiation dose. This move towards consensus would be to the benefit of the imaging community, referrers, and other related healthcare professionals, as well as patients, their caregivers, and the public.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission.
JACMP will publish:
-Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500.
-Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed.
-Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references.
-Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents.
-Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews.
-Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics.
-Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic