| 1. |
- Andersson, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
Improved radiation risk models applied to different patient groups in Sweden
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Radiatsionnaya Gygiena. - 1998-426X. ; 12:2, s. 44-54
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In radiological diagnostics and therapy, it is important that practitioners, referrers, (i.e. radiologists, radiation oncologists and others in healthcare) are aware of how much radiation a patient may receive from the various procedures used and associated health risk. The profession has a duty to inform patients or their representatives of the advantages and disadvantages of specific investigations or treatment plans. The need to estimate and communicate risks in connection with medical use of ionizing radiation is highlighted e.g. in the Russian Federation State Law No 3, §17.2, 1996 and in the EU directive (2013/59/EURATOM 2014). The most commonly used way to express harm in relation to low doses of ionizing radiation is use of the quantity effective dose (E). Effective dose, a radiation protection quantity, however is not intended to provide risk estimates for medical exposures. Its purpose is to optimize conditions for radiation workers (1865 years) or the general public; all groups with age distributions that differ from patients. In this paper the lifetime attributable risk was used to estimate the excess risk of receiving and dying of radiogenic cancer. The lifetime attributable risk estimations are generated from three different variables, gender, attained age and age at exposure giving the possibility to create age and gender specific cancer risk estimations. Initially, the US Environmental Protection Agency lifetime attributable risk coefficients which are intended to predict the cancer risk from ionizing radiation to a normal US population were applied. In this work, the lifetime attributable risk predictions were modified to the normal Swedish population and to cohorts of Swedish patients undergoing radiological and nuclear medicine examinations or treatments with survival times that differ from the normal population. For Swedish males, all organs were given the same absorbed dose, exposed at 20, 40 and 70 years, the lifetime attributable risk coefficients (Gy1) were 0.11, 0.068, and 0.038, respectively, which is lower than the corresponding figures for US males, 0.13, 0.077, and 0.040. For Swedish females, all organs were given the same absorbed dose, exposed at 40 years of age with a diagnosis of breast, colon or liver cancer, the lifetime attributable risk coefficients are 0.064, 0.034, and 0.0038, respectively, which is much lower than if a 40 years female without known cancer is exposed, 0.073.
|
|
| 2. |
- Moeller, Steffen, et al.
(författare)
-
Community-driven development for computational biology at Sprints, Hackathons and Codefests
- 2014
-
Ingår i: BMC Bioinformatics. - 1471-2105. ; 15, s. S7-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Computational biology comprises a wide range of technologies and approaches. Multiple technologies can be combined to create more powerful workflows if the individuals contributing the data or providing tools for its interpretation can find mutual understanding and consensus. Much conversation and joint investigation are required in order to identify and implement the best approaches. Traditionally, scientific conferences feature talks presenting novel technologies or insights, followed up by informal discussions during coffee breaks. In multi-institution collaborations, in order to reach agreement on implementation details or to transfer deeper insights in a technology and practical skills, a representative of one group typically visits the other. However, this does not scale well when the number of technologies or research groups is large. Conferences have responded to this issue by introducing Birds-of-a-Feather (BoF) sessions, which offer an opportunity for individuals with common interests to intensify their interaction. However, parallel BoF sessions often make it hard for participants to join multiple BoFs and find common ground between the different technologies, and BoFs are generally too short to allow time for participants to program together. Results: This report summarises our experience with computational biology Codefests, Hackathons and Sprints, which are interactive developer meetings. They are structured to reduce the limitations of traditional scientific meetings described above by strengthening the interaction among peers and letting the participants determine the schedule and topics. These meetings are commonly run as loosely scheduled unconferences (self-organized identification of participants and topics for meetings) over at least two days, with early introductory talks to welcome and organize contributors, followed by intensive collaborative coding sessions. We summarise some prominent achievements of those meetings and describe differences in how these are organised, how their audience is addressed, and their outreach to their respective communities. Conclusions: Hackathons, Codefests and Sprints share a stimulating atmosphere that encourages participants to jointly brainstorm and tackle problems of shared interest in a self-driven proactive environment, as well as providing an opportunity for new participants to get involved in collaborative projects.
|
|
