[
1. Vañó E, Miller DL, Martin CJ, et al. ICRP publication 135: diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging. Annals of the ICRP. 2017;46(1):1-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/014664531771720910.1177/014664531771720929065694
]Search in Google Scholar
[
2. Rothenberg LN, Pentlow KS. CT dosimetry and radiation safety. In: Goldman LW, Fowlkes JB, eds. Medical CT and Ultrasound: Current Technology and Applications. Madison, Wis: Advanced Medical Publishing; 1995:519-553
]Search in Google Scholar
[
3. Schauer DA, Linton OW. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements report shows substantial medical exposure increase. Radiology. 2009;253(2):293-296. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.253209049410.1148/radiol.253209049419864524
]Search in Google Scholar
[
4. IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 3. Radiation protection and safety of radiation sources: International basic safety standards. General safety requirements Part 3 (Spanish Edition). 2016.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
5. Santos J, etFoley S, Paulo G, et al. The establishment of computed tomography diagnostic reference levels in Portugal. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2014;158(3):307-317. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/nct22610.1093/rpd/nct22624043875
]Search in Google Scholar
[
6. de Gonzalez AB, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. The Lancet. 2004;363(9406):345-351. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(04)15433-010.1016/S0140-6736(04)15433-015070562
]Search in Google Scholar
[
7. Héliou R, Normandeau L, Beaudoin G. Towards dose reduction in CT: patient radiation dose assessment for CT examinations at university health center in Canada and comparison with national diagnostic reference levels. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2012;148(2):202-210. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncr02410.1093/rpd/ncr02421406432
]Search in Google Scholar
[
8. Vassileva J, Rehani M. Diagnostic reference levels. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(1):W1-W3. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.14.1279410.2214/AJR.14.1279425539261
]Search in Google Scholar
[
9. AAPM Report No. 96. The measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. Report of AAPM task group 23: CT Dosimetry. 2008. https://doi.org/10.37206/9710.37206/97
]Search in Google Scholar
[
10. Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA, Dunn M. NRPB-W67 doses from computed tomography (CT) examinations in the UK–2003 review. National Radiation Protection Board.2005.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
11. Olugbenga A. An Overview of International Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: Basic Safety Standards. 2020. http://elibrary.nnra.gov.ng/jspui/handle/123456789/488
]Search in Google Scholar
[
12. Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection: Revised December 1954. Annals of the ICRP/ICRP Publication. 1959;OS_1(1):iii-x. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0074-27402880014-610.1016/S0074-27402880014-6
]Search in Google Scholar
[
13. Larsson CM. Waste disposal and the recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection–Challenges for radioecology and environmental radiation protection. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity. 2009;100(12):1053-1057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2009.07.00310.1016/j.jenvrad.2009.07.00319643515
]Search in Google Scholar
[
14. Boal TJ, Pinak M. Dose limits to the lens of the eye: International Basic Safety Standards and related guidance. Annals of the ICRP. 2015. 44(1_suppl):112-117. https://doi.org/10.1177/014664531456232110.1177/014664531456232125816264
]Search in Google Scholar
[
15. Rehani M, Ciraj-Bjelac O, Vañó E, et al. ICRP Publication 117. Radiological protection in fluoroscopically guided procedures performed outside the imaging department. Annals of the ICRP. 2010;40(6):1-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icrp.2012.03.00110.1016/j.icrp.2012.03.00122732420
]Search in Google Scholar
[
16. Valentin J, Radiation and your patient: A guide for medical practitioners: ICRP Supporting Guidance 2: Approved by ICRP Committee 3 in September 2001. Annals of the ICRP. 2001;31(4):1-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-6453(02)00007-610.1016/S0146-6453(02)00007-6
]Search in Google Scholar
[
17. McCollough CH, Chen GH, Kalender W, et al. Achieving routine submillisievert CT scanning: report from the summit on management of radiation dose in CT. Radiology. 2012;264(2):567-580. https://doi.org//10.1148/radiol.1211226510.1148/radiol.12112265340135422692035
]Search in Google Scholar
[
18. Brady SL, Mirro AE, Moore BM, Kaufman RA. How to appropriately calculate effective dose for CT using either size-specific dose estimates or dose-length product. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2015;204(5):953-958. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.14.1331710.2214/AJR.14.1331725729893
]Search in Google Scholar
[
19. European Commission. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography (EUR 16262 EN). 2000. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d229c9e1-a967-49de-b169-59ee68605f1a
]Search in Google Scholar
[
20. Salama DH, Vassileva J, Mahdalyet G, el al. Establishing national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for computed tomography in Egypt. Physica Medica. 2017;39:16-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.05.05010.1016/j.ejmp.2017.05.05028711184
]Search in Google Scholar
[
21. Suliman II, Khamis HM, Ombada TH, et al. Radiation exposure during paediatric CT in Sudan: CT dose, organ and effective doses. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2015;167(4):513-518. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncu32110.1093/rpd/ncu32125377750
]Search in Google Scholar
[
22. Kaste SC, Brady SL, Yee B, et al. Is routine pelvic surveillance imaging necessary in patients with Wilms tumor? Cancer. 2013;119(1): 182-188. https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fcncr.2768710.1002/cncr.27687346110522736193
]Search in Google Scholar
[
23. Pantos I, Thalassinou S, Argentos S, et al. Adult patient radiation doses from non-cardiac CT examinations: a review of published results. British Journal of Radiology. 2011;84(1000):293-303. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/6907061410.1259/bjr/69070614347346421266399
]Search in Google Scholar
[
24. Razali MASM, Ahmad MZ, Roslee MAAM, Osman ND. Establishment of institutional diagnostic reference level for CT imaging associated with multiple anatomical regions. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2019:012067. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1248/1/01206710.1088/1742-6596/1248/1/012067
]Search in Google Scholar
[
25. Treier R, Aroua A, Verdunet FR, et al. Patient doses in CT examinations in Switzerland: implementation of national diagnostic reference levels. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2010;142(2-4):244-254. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncq27910.1093/rpd/ncq27920926508
]Search in Google Scholar
[
26. Roch P, Aubert B, French diagnostic reference levels in diagnostic radiology, computed tomography and nuclear medicine: 2004–2008 review. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2013;154(1):52-75. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncs15210.1093/rpd/ncs15222956562
]Search in Google Scholar
[
27. European Commission. Radiation Protection N° 180. Diagnostic Reference Levels in Thirty-six European Countries. Part 2/2. Diagnostic reference levels in thirty-six European countries. 2014. https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/nuclear-energy/radiation-protection/scientific-seminars-and-publications/radiation-protection-series-publications_en#ref-180
]Search in Google Scholar
[
28. Abuzaid MM, Elshami W, Tekin HO, et al. Computed tomography radiation doses for common computed tomography examinations: a nationwide dose survey in United Arab Emirates. Insights into Imaging. 2020;11(1):1-6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00891-610.1186/s13244-020-00891-6739972132748218
]Search in Google Scholar
[
29. Aroua A, Samara ET, Bochudet FO, al. Exposure of the Swiss population to computed tomography. BMC medical imaging 2013.13(1): 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2342-13-2210.1186/1471-2342-13-22373369323895057
]Search in Google Scholar
[
30. Le Coultre R, Bize J, Champendal M, et al. Exposure of the Swiss population by radiodiagnostics: 2013 review. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016;169(1-4):221-224. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncv46210.1093/rpd/ncv462491196126541187
]Search in Google Scholar
[
31. Hayton A, Wallace A, Marks P, et al. Australian diagnostic reference levels for multi detector computed tomography. Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine. 2013.36(1):19-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-013-0180-610.1007/s13246-013-0180-623307142
]Search in Google Scholar
[
32. Kanal KM, Butler PF, Sengupta D, et al. US diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for 10 adult CT examinations. Radiology. 2017;284(1):120-133. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.201716191110.1148/radiol.201716191128221093
]Search in Google Scholar
[
33. Kanal KM, Butler PF, Chatfield MB, et al. US diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for 10 pediatric CT examinations. Radiology. 2022;302(1):164-174. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.202121124110.1148/radiol.202121124134698569
]Search in Google Scholar
[
34. Wardlaw G, Martel N. Sci-Thur PM – Colourful Interactions: Highlights 07: Canadian computed tomography survey: national diagnostic reference levels. Med Phys. 2016;43:4932-4933. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.496176710.1118/1.4961767
]Search in Google Scholar
[
35. Kumamaru KK, Kogure Y, Suzuki M, et al. A strategy to optimize radiation exposure for non-contrast head CT: comparison with the Japanese diagnostic reference levels. Japanese Journal of Radiology. 2016;34(6):451-457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-016-0545-310.1007/s11604-016-0545-327097808
]Search in Google Scholar
[
36. Simantirakis, G, Hourdakis CJ, Economides S, et al. Diagnostic reference levels and patient doses in computed tomography examinations in Greece. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2015;163(3):319-324. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncu18210.1093/rpd/ncu18224891405
]Search in Google Scholar
[
37. Foley SJ, McEntee MF, Rainford LA. Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland. British Journal of Radiology. 2012;85(1018):1390-1397. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/1583954910.1259/bjr/15839549347402222595497
]Search in Google Scholar
[
38. Khoramian D, Sistani S, Hejazi P. Establishment of diagnostic reference levels arising from common CT examinations in Semnan County, Iran. Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering. 2019;25(1):51-55. https://doi.org/10.2478/pjmpe-2019-000810.2478/pjmpe-2019-0008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
39. Ataç GK, Parmaksız A, İnalet T, al. Patient doses from CT examinations in Turkey. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology. 2015;21(5):428.-434. https://doi.org/10.5152%2Fdir.2015.1430610.5152/dir.2015.14306455732926133189
]Search in Google Scholar
[
40. Atlı E, Uyanık SA, Öğüşlüet U, et al. Radiation doses from head, neck, chest and abdominal CT examinations: an institutional dose report. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology. 2021;27(1):147-151. https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2020.1956010.5152/dir.2020.19560783772733475510
]Search in Google Scholar
[
41. Kharita M, Khazzam S. Survey of patient dose in computed tomography in Syria 2009. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2010;141(2):149-161. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncq15510.1093/rpd/ncq15520511400
]Search in Google Scholar
[
42. Liang CR, Chen PXH, Kapuret J, et al. Establishment of institutional diagnostic reference level for computed tomography with automated dose-tracking software. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences. 2017;64(2):82-89. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.21010.1002/jmrs.210545433328247587
]Search in Google Scholar
[
43. Vilar-Palop J, Vilar J, Hernández-Aguado I, et al. Updated effective doses in radiology. Journal of Radiological Protection. 2016;36(4):975-990. https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/36/4/97510.1088/0952-4746/36/4/97527893456
]Search in Google Scholar
[
44. Smith-Bindman R, Moghadassi M, Wilson N, et al. Radiation doses in consecutive CT examinations from five University of California Medical Centers. Radiology. 2015;277(1):134-141. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.201514272810.1148/radiol.2015142728461387125988262
]Search in Google Scholar
[
45. Vilar-Palop J, Vilar J, Hernández-Aguado I, et al. Updated effective doses in radiology. Journal of Radiological Protection. 2016;36(4):975-990. https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/36/4/97510.1088/0952-4746/36/4/975
]Search in Google Scholar
[
46. Saeed MK, Alzoubi AS, Al-QahtaniJ. Regional survey of image quality and radiation dose in computed tomography examinations in Saudi Arabia. Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine. 2014;37(2):279-283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-014-0256-y10.1007/s13246-014-0256-y24609761
]Search in Google Scholar
[
47. Hasan N, Rizk C, Babikir E. National diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indications and patient size for adults’ computed tomography in the Kingdom of Bahrain. Radiation Physics and Chemistry. 2022:197(3):110147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.11014710.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110147
]Search in Google Scholar
[
48. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: Topics in CT: Radiation dose in CT. Radiographics. 2002;22(6):1541-1553. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.22602512810.1148/rg.22602512812432127
]Search in Google Scholar
[
49. Taylor S, van Muylem A, Howarth N, et al. CT dose survey in adults: what sample size for what precision? European Radiology. 2017;27(1):365-373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4333-310.1007/s00330-016-4333-327048530
]Search in Google Scholar
[
50. Lee KL, Beveridge T, Sanagou M, et al. Updated Australian diagnostic reference levels for adult CT. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences. 2020;67(1):5-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.37210.1002/jmrs.372706324232040878
]Search in Google Scholar
[
51. Karim MKA, Hashim S, Bradley DA, et al. Radiation doses from computed tomography practice in Johor Bahru, Malaysia. Radiation Physics and Chemistry. 2016;121:69-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2015.12.02010.1016/j.radphyschem.2015.12.020
]Search in Google Scholar
[
52. Muhammad NA, Abdul Karim MK, Abu Hassanet H, et al. Diagnostic reference level of radiation dose and image quality among paediatric CT examinations in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia. Diagnostics. 2020;10(8):591. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics1008059110.3390/diagnostics10080591746037632823818
]Search in Google Scholar