CT dosimetry: Comparison of measurement techniques and devices

Radiographics

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 245-253

  Bauhs, John A ^a   Vrieze, Thomas J ^a   Primak, Andrew N ^a   Bruesewitz, Michael R ^a   McCollough, Cynthia H ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; BODY BURDEN; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONFERENCE PAPER; EQUIPMENT; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; RADIATION INJURY; RADIATION MONITORING; RADIATION PROTECTION; RELATIVE BIOLOGIC EFFECTIVENESS;

BODY BURDEN; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; HUMANS; RADIATION INJURIES; RADIATION MONITORING; RADIATION PROTECTION; RELATIVE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTIVENESS; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 38349099222     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: 15271323     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.281075024     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (5)

1. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Bethesda, Md: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1987.
2. Shope TB, Gagne RM, Johnson GC. A method for describing the doses delivered by transmission x-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 1981;8:488-495.
3. International Electrotechnical Commission. Medical electrical equipment, part 2-44: particular requirements for the safety of x-ray equipment for computed tomography. IEC publication no. 60601-2-44. Ed 2.1. Geneva, Switzerland: International Electrotechnical Commission, 2002.
4. Dixon RL, Ekstrand KE. A film dosimetry system for use in computed tomography. Radiology 1978;127:255-258.
5. Boone JM. The trouble with CTDI100. Med Phys 2007;34:1364-1371.