Individual Radiosensitivity and its Relevance to Health Physics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiation protection regulations have been established to reduce exposure of individuals to acceptable safe levels. These limits assume that people have similar responses to ionizing radiation and that there is no variation in individual radiation risk. The purpose of this research was to determine if apoptosis in lymphocytes can be used to assess individual sensitivity to ionizing radiation. Blood samples were taken from 54 males ranging in age from 19-85 years. Apoptosis was measured using modified flow cytometry based Annexin-FITC/7AAD and DiOC(6)/7AAD assays in different populations of lymphocytes (total mixed lymphocyte population, subset CD4+ or CD8+ lymphocytes) after exposure to in vitro doses of 0, 2, 4 or 8Gy (dose rate 0.1Gy/min). The variation in individual responses to radiation was large. The variation was the largest in the CD4+ lymphocyte sub-population. Radiation-induced apoptosis decreased with age of donor demonstrating that as people age their lymphocytes may become relatively more resistant to radiation. This research shows that individuals have marked differences in their sensitivity to radiation and protection policies may someday need to be tailored for some individuals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".