Economic Considerations for Radiation Protection in Medical Settings—Is It Time for a New Paradigm?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The full ALARA principle includes "as low as reasonably achievable" taking social and economic factors into consideration. The International Commission on Radiological Protection advises a conventional cost benefit approach (e.g., cost per monetized averted stochastic effects or years of life saved) to consider economic factors. Given small incremental radiation dose reductions to patients, workers, or the public that may be realized in medical settings and the correspondingly small changes to theoretical stochastic effects, a conventional cost benefit approach is less than ideal. This is illustrated in the case studies presented in this paper. Alternate approaches, such as cost per unit of radiation dose averted (e.g., $/μSv averted), cancer induction/fatality probabilistic thresholds, or thresholds relative to natural background radiation may be alternate options. However, the decision regarding what is a "safe" level of radiation and what are reasonable costs to make it "safer" are driven by societal values and may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it