Is there a benefit in promoting the concept of radiation risk?

British Journal of Radiology

Volumn 77, Issue 919, 2004, Pages 545-546

  Williams, J ^a  

^a ROYAL INFIRMARY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IONIZING RADIATION; NOTE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTION; RADIATION EQUIPMENT; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION HAZARD; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIODIAGNOSIS; RADIOLOGIST; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ULTRASOUND; X RAY;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOGRAPHY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 4344646223     PISSN: 00071285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/bjr/25042241     Document Type: Note

References (6)

1. Hughes JS. Ionising radiation exposure of the UK population: 1999 review, NRPB-R311.
2. National Radiological Protection Board. Protection of the patient in X-ray computed tomography. Doc NRPB 1992; 3, No. 4.
3. National Radiological Protection Board. Guidelines on patient dose to promote the optimisation of protection for diagnostic medical exposures. Doc NRPB 1999; 10, No. 1.
4. Huda W, Gkanatsios NA. Radiation dosimetry for extremity radiographs. Health Physics 1998;75:492-9.
5. National Radiological Protection Board. Guidelines on radiological standards for primary dental care. Doc NRPB 1994; 5, No. 3.
6. National Radiological Protection Board. X-rays: how safe are they? Chilton: NRPB, 2001.