Strengths and Weaknesses of Dosimetry Used in Studies of Low-Dose Radiation Exposure and Cancer
| Autor: | Robert D. Daniels, Isabelle Thierry-Chef, Martha S. Linet, Gerald M. Kendall, Harry M. Cullings |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Cancer Research
medicine.medical_specialty Neoplasms Radiation-Induced MEDLINE Article 030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Occupational Exposure Radiation Ionizing Humans Medicine Dosimetry Medical physics Radiometry Spurious relationship business.industry Cancer General Medicine Radiation Exposure medicine.disease Causality Critical appraisal Oncology 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis Cohort Risk assessment business Strengths and weaknesses |
| Zdroj: | J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr |
| ISSN: | 1745-6614 1052-6773 |
| DOI: | 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgaa001 |
| Popis: | 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. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|