IF 1.4 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Andreas Engström, Mats Isaksson, Reza Javid, Per-Anders Larsson, Charlotta Lundh, Jens Wikström, Magnus Båth
{"title":"How much resources are reasonable to spend on radiological protection?","authors":"Andreas Engström, Mats Isaksson, Reza Javid, Per-Anders Larsson, Charlotta Lundh, Jens Wikström, Magnus Båth","doi":"10.1088/1361-6498/ad9f73","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In short terms, a society's available resources are finite and must be prioritised. The more resources that are spent on radiological protection, the lesser resources are available for other needs. The ALARA principle states that exposure of ionizing radiation should be kept as low as reasonably achievable, taking into account economic and societal factors. In practice, one of several approaches to determine what is considered as reasonably achievable is cost-benefit analysis. A demanding part of cost-benefit analysis is to decide on an α value, which stipulates the value of radiological protection. There are different conversion methods on how to convert societal costs into an α value. However, with the assistance of recent developments within both health economics and radiological protection room for improvements was found. Therefore, the aims of the present study were to develop a new conversion method (on how to convert societal costs into an α value) and to provide recommendations of α values for each member country of The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). With the help of systematic reviews of societal costs (the value of a statistical life, productivity losses and healthcare costs) and discount rates, as well as Monte Carlo simulations of the number of years between exposure and cancer diagnosis, a new conversion method and recommendations of α values could be presented. The new conversion method was expressed as a discounted nominal risk of exposure with a median (interquartile range) of 175 (136-222) per 10 000 persons per Sv for the public and 169 (134-207) per 10 000 persons per Sv for workers. For OECD in general, recommendations of α values were determined to be $56-170 per man.mSv for the public and $61-162 per man.mSv for workers (2023-USD).</p>","PeriodicalId":50068,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Radiological Protection","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Radiological Protection","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ad9f73","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简而言之,社会的可用资源是有限的,必须分清轻重缓急。用于辐射防护的资源越多,可用于其他需求的资源就越少。ALARA 原则指出,电离辐射照射量应在考虑到经济和社会因素的情况下保持在可合理实现的最低水平。在实践中,成本效益分析是确定可合理达到的程度的几种方法之一。成本效益分析的一个重要部分是确定一个 α 值,它规定了辐射防护的价值。关于如何将社会成本转换成 α 值,有不同的转换方法。然而,在卫生经济学和放射防护领域最新发展的帮助下,我们发现了改进的空间。因此,本研究的目的是开发一种新的换算方法(如何将社会成本换算成 α 值),并为经济合作与发展组织(OECD)的每个成员国提供 α 值建议。借助对社会成本(统计寿命价值、生产力损失和医疗成本)和贴现率的系统审查,以及对暴露与癌症诊断之间年数的蒙特卡罗模拟,可以提出一种新的换算方法和 α 值建议。新的换算方法以暴露的名义风险贴现率表示,公众的中位数(四分位数之间的范围)为每 10 000 人每 Sv 175(136-222),工人的中位数(四分位数之间的范围)为每 10 000 人每 Sv 169(134-207)。一般而言,经合组织的α值建议为:公众 56-170 美元/人.mSv,工人 61-162 美元/人.mSv(2023 年-美元)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How much resources are reasonable to spend on radiological protection?

In short terms, a society's available resources are finite and must be prioritised. The more resources that are spent on radiological protection, the lesser resources are available for other needs. The ALARA principle states that exposure of ionizing radiation should be kept as low as reasonably achievable, taking into account economic and societal factors. In practice, one of several approaches to determine what is considered as reasonably achievable is cost-benefit analysis. A demanding part of cost-benefit analysis is to decide on an α value, which stipulates the value of radiological protection. There are different conversion methods on how to convert societal costs into an α value. However, with the assistance of recent developments within both health economics and radiological protection room for improvements was found. Therefore, the aims of the present study were to develop a new conversion method (on how to convert societal costs into an α value) and to provide recommendations of α values for each member country of The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). With the help of systematic reviews of societal costs (the value of a statistical life, productivity losses and healthcare costs) and discount rates, as well as Monte Carlo simulations of the number of years between exposure and cancer diagnosis, a new conversion method and recommendations of α values could be presented. The new conversion method was expressed as a discounted nominal risk of exposure with a median (interquartile range) of 175 (136-222) per 10 000 persons per Sv for the public and 169 (134-207) per 10 000 persons per Sv for workers. For OECD in general, recommendations of α values were determined to be $56-170 per man.mSv for the public and $61-162 per man.mSv for workers (2023-USD).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Radiological Protection
Journal of Radiological Protection 环境科学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
26.70%
发文量
137
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Radiological Protection publishes articles on all aspects of radiological protection, including non-ionising as well as ionising radiations. Fields of interest range from research, development and theory to operational matters, education and training. The very wide spectrum of its topics includes: dosimetry, instrument development, specialized measuring techniques, epidemiology, biological effects (in vivo and in vitro) and risk and environmental impact assessments. The journal encourages publication of data and code as well as results.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信