Annals of the ICRP最新文献

{"title":"Establishment of Nuclear Disaster Health Assistance Team (NuHAT) for nurse-led radiation risk management after the Fukushima nuclear accident.","authors":"S Horita, T Kato, N Sugiura, T Yamaguchi, K Yoshida, A Goto, E Konishi, T Kusama","doi":"10.1177/01466453251412039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251412039","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>After the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in 2011, a gap emerged between residents, government officials, and experts in terms of understanding and accepting radiation risks, and this gap remains unresolved. Therefore, the Radiological Nursing Society of Japan hopes that nurses, who possess the most information on residents' daily lives and health conditions and are physically and psychologically close to residents, can play a role in helping residents understand and accept radiation risks via the Nuclear Disaster Health Assistance Team (NuHAT) that it has established. The NuHAT aims to provide radiation risk management for the population during normal times and in the early, intermediate, and long term following a radiation or nuclear accident. The members of the NuHAT are those who have completed a Certified Nurse Specialist in Radiological Nursing (CNS) course and a graduate course in public health nursing. Going forward, we will continue our activities to raise awareness of the NuHAT among local residents, government officials, and nuclear power operators and to improve the quality of the NuHAT.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251412039"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148036184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Are cancer risks from radiation probabilistic (stochastic) or deterministic (tissue reaction)?","authors":"N Nakamura","doi":"10.1177/01466453251412093","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251412093","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Radiation risks for cancer are classified into probabilistic effects because the induction of oncogenic mutations in a single epithelial cell is thought to be causally related to the process of carcinogenesis. However, two observations remain unanswered by the theory. One is a <i>parallel</i> shift of mouse survival curves towards younger ages after a radiation exposure, and the other is a <i>decreasing trend</i> of relative risk for cancer with an increase in postexposure time. Both are readily explained if it is assumed only that a radiation exposure causes a shift of the spontaneous tumours to appear earlier as a result of tissue damage which favours a transformed cell(s) to grow faster. In line with this notion, there are reports showing that exposures to high doses of acute radiation did not increase the proportion of mice dying from tumours, while their lifespans were shortened. In contrast, although there are reports showing a dose-related increase in the proportion of tumour deaths, the studies were either prematurely terminated or the ages were adjusted, and they are not considered to support the tumour induction model of radiation. As it seems that radiation carcinogenesis is a type of tissue response, it should be more appropriately classified as a deterministic effect of radiation. It is added that this article deals mainly with the data obtained under high-dose and high-dose-rate exposure conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251412093"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148036228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Recommendations for effective dissemination of scientific information, based on the analyses of Twitter data concerning radiation after the Fukushima nuclear accident.","authors":"H A Torii, K Uno","doi":"10.1177/01466453251412037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251412037","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>After the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident, there were various conflicting opinions regarding radiation risks, and especially on social media, there was a marked division between groups that disseminated information based on scientific facts and those that disseminated emotional rather than factual statements. It is necessary to consider how scientists can effectively disseminate correct information to the public, focusing on the use of social media, which is becoming more and more important. We have compiled a set of recommendations for science and risk communication in the new era, based on our research results on the analysis of Twitter big data concerning radiation, corresponding network simulations of information dissemination and direct interviews to influencers, as well as on our experience in Web-based information transmission after the accident. Our studies have shown that experts must send out scientific information promptly. Immediate reaction is most important in fact-checking circulating information and denying wrong messages before they diffuse quickly in the society. There is no time to wait for experts' consensus, and anyway unified opinions are not trusted as the public suspects them to be biased. The scientific community must be prepared for crises and build cooperation networks among scientists.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251412037"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148036209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Analysis for raising radon public awareness.","authors":"K G Ivanova, J N Djounova, I K Tasev","doi":"10.1177/01466453251413076","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251413076","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Within the framework of the National Radon Action Plan 2017-2027, the implementation of a communication strategy is included. In this regard, public awareness was assessed through a public opinion national survey based on a questionnaire designed under the EU RadoNorm project. The type of survey was computer-assisted web interviewing (CAWI) of 1009 participants randomly selected. The analysis of the study aims to improve and raise public awareness. The results show that Bulgarian citizens continue to feel that they are not well informed (72%) about the radon risk. Approximately 50% will be very attentive to the information related to radon remediation action and will try to learn more. The channels for receiving information were investigated. The most preferred channel is television (74.9%), followed by social media (38.6%). Participants' intentions to measure and take corrective action if advised were studied, and only 37.1% are confident that they would be able to test. Serious attention should be paid to attracting stakeholder participation, and the focus of communication strategies should be on raising awareness in specific interest groups and their inclusiveness to health protection measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251413076"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148036189","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Criteria for designating nurses as radiation workers in Japan.","authors":"S Horita, K Ota, E Konishi, N Sugiura, K Sugai, T Kusama","doi":"10.1177/01466453251412137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251412137","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In Japan, individual medical facilities are responsible for deciding whether their nurses, doctors, and other healthcare professionals are legally designated as radiation workers and thereby subject to radiation control measures. The designation criteria vary across individual institutions, causing inconsistencies that make workers performing similar roles receive different designations. In March 2020, the Radiological Nursing Society of Japan developed the 'Guidelines for the Designation of Nurses as Radiation Workers', proposing criteria for designating nurses as radiation workers. In developing the guideline, a survey of 3000 hospitals in Japan was conducted. The survey found that many hospitals did not have a standard for designating nurses as radiation workers; however, they did so based on the department to which the nurses belonged and the nature of their work. Based on these surveyed results, the guideline divides nurses into three categories: (A) radiation worker, (B) temporary visitors to the controlled area, and (C) general nurse who does not fall under radiation worker or temporary entry. In the future, we will conduct publicity campaigns to make the guidelines accessible to as many medical professionals as possible.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251412137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148036269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"National medical occupational radiation dose monitoring in Saudi Arabia.","authors":"M Aljuaid, K Alsiraj","doi":"10.1177/01466453251411988","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251411988","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This is a national study about the occupational Radiation doses for medical workers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia which covers the period since the establishment of the Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Commission (NRRC). The study aims to analyse the occupational radiation dose for medical workers in different medical practices (diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine, and radiotherapy). Occupational dose records covering the period from 2018 to 2022 were collected and monitored for a total of 4000 medical workers. Workers engaged in diagnostic radiology make the dominant contribution to the collective effective dose of 85% radiation medical workers. The annual average effective doses for the 5-year period were 1.53, 0.98, 0.96, and 0.74 mSv for interventional radiology, diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine, and radiotherapy, respectively. Among the four practices, interventional radiology represented the highest annual average effective dose. On the other hand, the ratio of the annual average effective dose was (1.67 to 1.45) which represents a 13% reduction with 56% increase in the number of workers from 2018 to 2022. The results of the annual dose were below the national dose limit of 20 mSv. The occupational doses were mostly within the dose limit, and further efforts for the reduction of radiation dose to the groups with high occupational dose are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251411988"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147989336","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How to involve stakeholders, especially citizens, in the revisioning process of ICRP general recommendation: An analysis of ICRP public comments.","authors":"M Hayashi, Y Hamaoka","doi":"10.1177/01466453251412128","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251412128","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aims to propose measures to promote stakeholder, especially citizens, involvement in the revision process of the General Recommendation (GR). To achieve this, we analysed the public comments for ICRP recommendations. Sixty-one public comments have been conducted by ICRP since 2005; a total of 1613 comments were posted (an average of 26.4 comments/publication draft). The draft of ICRP <i>Publication 146</i> received 308 comments, followed by ICRP <i>Publication 103</i>'s (2007 GR) second and first drafts which received 217 and 195 comments, respectively. We examined the posters', 'organisation', and 'name' and classified them as general public (GP) or not (non-GP). Among the 1135 posters, we identified 268 GP and 867 non-GP. ICRP <i>Publication 146</i> received 251 comments from GP, but the first and second drafts of ICRP <i>Publication 103</i> received only 33 and 23 comments, respectively, from GP. The largest comment for the draft of ICRP <i>Publication 146</i> is attributed to the citizen group's briefing, and ICRP accepted Japanese comments. Despite the large number of comments, critical comments from GP were not well reflected in ICRP <i>Publication 146</i>. In developing ISO 26000: Guidance on social responsibility, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) involved representatives from (1) industry, (2) government, (3) labour, (4) consumers, (5) NGOs, and (6) service, support, research, and others. The working group included 355 experts and 77 observers from 72 countries. In 2008's public comment, 5200 comments were posted worldwide. On the other hand, the ICRP 2007 GR was developed by 14 main commission members of ICRP or specialists in radiological protection. Accepting comments in multiple languages effectively promotes public engagement with ICRP recommendations. However, a reflection of citizens' comments was limited in the past ICRP public comments. Involving the general public or a citizen group from the initial stage of the revision process is essential to formulating multi-stakeholder-involved general recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251412128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147983770","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Application of dose distribution models to the functional assessment of radiation protection measures in a group-considering workers' satisfaction with radiation protection.","authors":"S Kumazawa, N Toyota, K Katoh","doi":"10.1177/01466453251411684","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251411684","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To determine the quality of radiation protection in a group, it is useful to analyse histograms of doses within the group. In this case, the distribution of individual doses is fundamental to the analysis of the group. We have shown that the hybrid lognormal (HLN) distribution is useful for this analysis. On the other hand, individual worker satisfaction with radiation protection is also an important evaluation factor, and this factor is thought to shape the HLN distribution. In this study, in addition to fitting the HLN distribution to actual worker data, we also examined whether satisfaction with radiation protection follows the HLN. The results showed that the distribution of individual satisfaction in the population also follows the HLN distribution with an upper bound. These results indicate that understanding the distribution characteristics in a group is useful for evaluating the function of radiation protection in a group.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251411684"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147983759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Radiation protection calculations for an Am-Be neutron source.","authors":"Y Fried, A Ben-Shlomo, O Aviv, Z Yungrais, M Tessler, L Epstein","doi":"10.1177/01466453251412141","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251412141","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When calculating dose rates around an Am-Be source, one typically focuses on the neutron emission. In high activity Am-Be sources, there is a need to consider two additional contributors to the dose: low-energy photon emission from the ²⁴¹Am decay (59.5 keV and an additional 4.4-MeV photon from the de-excitation of ¹²C* (created by the nuclear reaction of the alpha captured by ⁹Be). Usually, the dose rate constants (gamma factors) found in the literature provide a good estimation for the dose rates around a point source. For ²⁴¹Am however, the gamma-ray dose constant varies significantly (up to 50%) among different publications and is not reproducible by different methods. In order to overcome this challenge, we performed dose calculations using FLUKA - a multipurpose Monte Carlo code for the transport and interaction of elementary particles and heavy ions. This work shows the calculated dose rates around a 1.85-GBq Am-Be source and compared to analytical calculations and results from radiation measurements. It was discovered that the contribution of the photons to the dose rates is in the same order of magnitude as the dose rates from the neutrons.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251412141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147983816","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Individual differences in medical radiation exposure in CT dosimetry based on age and BMI.","authors":"W Chang","doi":"10.1177/01466453251412026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466453251412026","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Exposure settings should vary with patients to have an acceptable quality image with an appropriate patient dose. To manage medical exposure from computed tomography (CT), the size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) have been recommended to replace the volume computed tomography dose index because it considers patient size. However, organ dose is deemed more appropriate in the radiation protection field due to its correlation with radiation risk. In this presentation, the difference in medical radiation exposure in CT based on age and body mass index (BMI) by using the web-based CT dose calculator WAZA-ARIv2 and dosimetry system of radiophotoluminescence dosimeters (RGDs) and anthropomorphic phantoms will be introduced. In addition, the feasibility of BMI-based and age-based correction methods for organ dose estimation will also be investigated. For both BMI-based and age-based correction methods, the SSDE-associated correction factors showed consistency with the experimental results. Implementation of the SSDE-associated correction factors to the CT dosimetry systems is feasible, and organ dose estimation accuracy can be improved by applying these two correction methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":39551,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the ICRP","volume":" ","pages":"1466453251412026"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2026-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147934338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}