Hubbry Logo
Absorbed doseAbsorbed doseMain
Open search
Absorbed dose
Community hub
Absorbed dose
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Absorbed dose
Absorbed dose
Absorbed dose
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Absorbed dose of ionizing radiation
Common symbols
D
SI unitgray
Other units
rad
In SI base unitsJ⋅kg−1

Absorbed dose is a dose quantity which represents the specific energy (energy per unit mass) deposited by ionizing radiation in living matter. Absorbed dose is used in the calculation of dose uptake in living tissue in both radiation protection (reduction of harmful effects), and radiation oncology (potential beneficial effects, for example in cancer treatment). It is also used to directly compare the effect of radiation on inanimate matter such as in radiation hardening.

The SI unit of measure is the gray (Gy), which is defined as one joule of energy absorbed per kilogram of matter.[1] The older, non-SI CGS unit rad, is sometimes also used, predominantly in the USA.

Relation between some ionizing radiation units[2]

Deterministic effects

[edit]

Conventionally, in radiation protection, unmodified absorbed dose is only used for indicating the immediate health effects due to high levels of acute dose. These are tissue effects, such as in acute radiation syndrome, which are also known as deterministic effects. These are effects which are certain to happen in a short time. The time between exposure and vomiting may be used as a heuristic for quantifying a dose when more precise means of testing are unavailable.[3]

Effects of acute radiation exposure

[edit]
Phase Symptom Whole-body absorbed dose (Gy)
1–2 Gy 2–6 Gy 6–8 Gy 8–30 Gy > 30 Gy
Immediate Nausea and vomiting 5–50% 50–100% 75–100% 90–100% 100%
Time of onset 2–6 h 1–2 h 10–60 min < 10 min Minutes
Duration < 24 h 24–48 h < 48 h < 48 h — (patients die in < 48 h)
Diarrhea None None to mild (< 10%) Heavy (> 10%) Heavy (> 95%) Heavy (100%)
Time of onset — 3–8 h 1–3 h < 1 h < 1 h
Headache Slight Mild to moderate (50%) Moderate (80%) Severe (80–90%) Severe (100%)
Time of onset — 4–24 h 3–4 h 1–2 h < 1 h
Fever None Moderate increase (10–100%) Moderate to severe (100%) Severe (100%) Severe (100%)
Time of onset — 1–3 h < 1 h < 1 h < 1 h
CNS function No impairment Cognitive impairment 6–20 h Cognitive impairment > 24 h Rapid incapacitation Seizures, tremor, ataxia, lethargy
Latent period 28–31 days 7–28 days < 7 days None None
Illness Mild to moderate leukopenia
Fatigue
Weakness 		Moderate to severe leukopenia
Purpura
Hemorrhage
Infections
Alopecia after 3 Gy 		Severe leukopenia
High fever
Diarrhea
Vomiting
Dizziness and disorientation
Hypotension
Electrolyte disturbance 		Nausea
Vomiting
Severe diarrhea
High fever
Electrolyte disturbance
Shock 		— (patients die in < 48h)
Mortality Without care 0–5% 5–95% 95–100% 100% 100%
With care 0–5% 5–50% 50–100% 99–100% 100%
Death 6–8 weeks 4–6 weeks 2–4 weeks 2 days – 2 weeks 1–2 days
Table source[4]

Radiation therapy

[edit]
Main article: radiation therapy

Dose computation

[edit]

The absorbed dose is equal to the radiation exposure (ions or C/kg) of the radiation beam multiplied by the ionization energy of the medium to be ionized.

For example, the ionization energy of dry air at 20 °C and 101.325 kPa of pressure is 33.97±0.05 J/C.[5] (33.97 eV per ion pair) Therefore, an exposure of 2.58×10−4 C/kg (1 roentgen) would deposit an absorbed dose of 8.76×10−3 J/kg (0.00876 Gy or 0.876 rad) in dry air at those conditions.

When the absorbed dose is not uniform, or when it is only applied to a portion of a body or object, an absorbed dose representative of the entire item can be calculated by taking a mass-weighted average of the absorbed doses at each point.

More precisely,[6]

Where

  • is the mass-averaged absorbed dose of the entire item ;
  • is the item of interest;
  • is the absorbed dose density (absorbed dose per unit volume) as a function of location;
  • is the density (mass per unit volume) as a function of location;
  • is volume.

Stochastic risk - conversion to equivalent dose

[edit]
External dose quantities used in radiation protection and dosimetry
Graphic showing relationship of "protection dose" quantities in SI units

For stochastic radiation risk, defined as the probability of cancer induction and genetic effects occurring over a long time scale, consideration must be given to the type of radiation and the sensitivity of the irradiated tissues, which requires the use of modifying factors to produce a risk factor in sieverts. One sievert carries with it a 5.5% chance of eventually developing cancer based on the linear no-threshold model.[7][8] This calculation starts with the absorbed dose.

To represent stochastic risk the dose quantities equivalent dose HT and effective dose E are used, and appropriate dose factors and coefficients are used to calculate these from the absorbed dose.[9] Equivalent and effective dose quantities are expressed in units of the sievert or rem which implies that biological effects have been taken into account. The derivation of stochastic risk is in accordance with the recommendations of the International Committee on Radiation Protection (ICRP) and International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU). The coherent system of radiological protection quantities developed by them is shown in the accompanying diagram.

For whole body radiation, with Gamma rays or X-rays the modifying factors are numerically equal to 1, which means that in that case the dose in grays equals the dose in sieverts.

Development of the absorbed dose concept and the gray

[edit]
Using early Crookes tube X-Ray apparatus in 1896. One man is viewing his hand with a fluoroscope to optimise tube emissions, the other has his head close to the tube. No precautions are being taken.
The Radiology Martyrs monument, erected 1936 at St. Georg hospital in Hamburg, more names added in 1959.

Wilhelm Röntgen first discovered X-rays on November 8, 1895, and their use spread very quickly for medical diagnostics, particularly broken bones and embedded foreign objects where they were a revolutionary improvement over previous techniques.

Due to the wide use of X-rays and the growing realisation of the dangers of ionizing radiation, measurement standards became necessary for radiation intensity and various countries developed their own, but using differing definitions and methods. Eventually, in order to promote international standardisation, the first International Congress of Radiology (ICR) meeting in London in 1925, proposed a separate body to consider units of measure. This was called the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, or ICRU,[a] and came into being at the Second ICR in Stockholm in 1928, under the chairmanship of Manne Siegbahn.[10][11][b]

One of the earliest techniques of measuring the intensity of X-rays was to measure their ionising effect in air by means of an air-filled ion chamber. At the first ICRU meeting it was proposed that one unit of X-ray dose should be defined as the quantity of X-rays that would produce one esu of charge in one cubic centimetre of dry air at 0 °C and 1 standard atmosphere of pressure. This unit of radiation exposure was named the roentgen in honour of Wilhelm Röntgen, who had died five years previously. At the 1937 meeting of the ICRU, this definition was extended to apply to gamma radiation.[12] This approach, although a great step forward in standardisation, had the disadvantage of not being a direct measure of the absorption of radiation, and thereby the ionisation effect, in various types of matter including human tissue, and was a measurement only of the effect of the X-rays in a specific circumstance; the ionisation effect in dry air.[13]

In 1940, Louis Harold Gray, who had been studying the effect of neutron damage on human tissue, together with William Valentine Mayneord and the radiobiologist John Read, published a paper in which a new unit of measure, dubbed the "gram roentgen" (symbol: gr) was proposed, and defined as "that amount of neutron radiation which produces an increment in energy in unit volume of tissue equal to the increment of energy produced in unit volume of water by one roentgen of radiation".[14] This unit was found to be equivalent to 88 ergs in air, and made the absorbed dose, as it subsequently became known, dependent on the interaction of the radiation with the irradiated material, not just an expression of radiation exposure or intensity, which the roentgen represented. In 1953 the ICRU recommended the rad, equal to 100 erg/g, as the new unit of measure of absorbed radiation. The rad was expressed in coherent cgs units.[12]

In the late 1950s, the CGPM invited the ICRU to join other scientific bodies to work on the development of the International System of Units, or SI.[15] It was decided to define the SI unit of absorbed radiation as energy deposited per unit mass which is how the rad had been defined, but in MKS units it would be J/kg. This was confirmed in 1975 by the 15th CGPM, and the unit was named the "gray" in honour of Louis Harold Gray, who had died in 1965. The gray was equal to 100 rad, the cgs unit.

Other uses

[edit]

Absorbed dose is also used to manage the irradiation and measure the effects of ionising radiation on inanimate matter in a number of fields.

Component survivability

[edit]

Absorbed dose is used to rate the survivability of devices such as electronic components in ionizing radiation environments.

Radiation hardening

[edit]

The measurement of absorbed dose absorbed by inanimate matter is vital in the process of radiation hardening which improves the resistance of electronic devices to radiation effects.

Food irradiation

[edit]

Absorbed dose is the physical dose quantity used to ensure irradiated food has received the correct dose to ensure effectiveness. Variable doses are used depending on the application and can be as high as 70 kGy.

[edit]

The following table shows radiation quantities in SI and non-SI units:

Ionizing radiation related quantities
Quantity Unit Symbol Derivation Year SI equivalent
Activity (A) becquerel Bq s−1 1974 SI unit
curie Ci 3.7×1010 s−1 1953 3.7×1010 Bq
rutherford Rd 106 s−1 1946 1000000 Bq
Exposure (X) coulomb per kilogram C/kg C⋅kg−1 of air 1974 SI unit
röntgen R esu / 0.001293 g of air 1928 2.58×10−4 C/kg
Absorbed dose (D) gray Gy J⋅kg−1 1974 SI unit
erg per gram erg/g erg⋅g−1 1950 1.0×10−4 Gy
rad rad 100 erg⋅g−1 1953 0.010 Gy
Equivalent dose (H) sievert Sv J⋅kg−1 × WR 1977 SI unit
röntgen equivalent man rem 100 erg⋅g−1 × WR 1971 0.010 Sv
Effective dose (E) sievert Sv J⋅kg−1 × WR × WT 1977 SI unit
röntgen equivalent man rem 100 erg⋅g−1 × WR × WT 1971 0.010 Sv

Although the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission permits the use of the units curie, rad, and rem alongside SI units,[16] the European Union European units of measurement directives required that their use for "public health ... purposes" be phased out by 31 December 1985.[17]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Literature

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Absorbed dose

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Absorbed dose is a fundamental quantity in physics, defined as the mean imparted by to a specified point in , divided by the of the at that point. It quantifies the amount of absorbed per unit , typically in tissues or materials exposed to such as alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays, or X-rays. This measure is essential for assessing the physical interaction of with , independent of the biological effects. The SI unit of absorbed dose is the gray (Gy), where 1 Gy equals 1 joule of energy absorbed per of material (J/kg). Prior to the adoption of the gray in 1975 as part of the , the common unit was the rad (radiation absorbed dose), defined in 1953 as 100 ergs of energy per gram of material, with 1 Gy equivalent to 100 rad. These units allow for precise calculation of energy deposition, which is critical in fields like , radiotherapy, and nuclear safety. While absorbed dose provides a physical basis for , it does not account for the varying biological damage caused by different types of ; for that, the is used, calculated by multiplying absorbed dose by a radiation weighting factor (e.g., 20 for alpha particles versus 1 for gamma rays). In , absorbed dose serves as the foundation for deriving protection quantities like effective dose, which further weights for tissue sensitivity to estimate health risks such as cancer induction. Typical background absorbed doses are low, around 2-3 milligray (mGy) per year from natural sources, but therapeutic applications can involve doses up to several gray.

Fundamentals

Definition

The absorbed dose is a fundamental quantity in radiation physics that quantifies the energy deposited by ionizing radiation per unit mass of irradiated material. It is defined as the quotient of the mean energy imparted by ionizing radiation to matter of mass dmdm divided by that mass, expressed mathematically as D=dεdm,D = \frac{d\varepsilon}{dm}, where DD is the absorbed dose and dεd\varepsilon is the mean energy imparted. This definition applies to any material and emphasizes the local energy transfer rather than the initial radiation flux. Energy deposition occurs primarily through interactions of —such as , , or heavier charged particles—with the atoms in the material. For , key mechanisms include the , where the is fully absorbed by an inner-shell , ejecting it and leading to subsequent ; , in which the scatters off an outer-shell , transferring partial energy and producing a ; and , where high-energy (above 1.022 MeV) convert into an -positron pair near a nucleus, with the excess energy shared as . These processes result in secondary charged particles that dissipate their energy through further ionizations and excitations, ultimately heating the material or causing chemical changes. Unlike exposure, which measures the produced by photons in air (quantified as charge per unit of air), absorbed dose focuses on the actual absorbed in any medium, making it more versatile for assessing effects in diverse materials like tissue or shielding. For instance, in human tissue, absorbed dose characterizes the localized energy transfer from interactions, which can disrupt molecular bonds and initiate biological responses.

Units

The SI unit of absorbed dose is the gray (Gy), defined as the absorption of one joule of energy per kilogram of irradiated material (1 Gy = 1 J/kg). The gray replaced the older non-SI unit, the rad (radiation absorbed dose), which was defined as 100 ergs per gram of material; the conversion factor is 1 Gy = 100 rad, and this change was adopted in to align with the coherent (SI) for global standardization. In , the absorbed dose has units [D] = J/kg = m²/s², reflecting the ratio of energy to mass. Practical scales of absorbed dose range from typical annual exposures of approximately 2–3 mGy worldwide to whole-body lethal doses around 4–5 Gy. For , 1 Gy is equivalent to about 6.24 × 10^{12} MeV/kg.

Measurement

Direct Measurement Methods

Direct measurement of absorbed dose relies on physical detectors that quantify energy deposition from in a medium, providing empirical essential for and verification in . These methods employ various principles, such as , , optical changes, and thermal effects, to convert radiation interactions into measurable signals calibrated to the gray (Gy) unit. Ionization chambers are widely used for reference , operating on the principle of measuring the produced by in a gas-filled cavity, typically air, within a solid medium. The absorbed dose in the surrounding medium is then determined using cavity theory, specifically the Bragg-Gray relation, which assumes equilibrium and states that the dose in the medium is proportional to the ionization in the cavity, scaled by the ratio of mass collision stopping powers. This relation is expressed as: Dm=Dg(smsg)D_m = D_g \left( \frac{s_m}{s_g} \right) where DmD_m is the absorbed dose in the medium, DgD_g is the dose in the gas, and (smsg)\left( \frac{s_m}{s_g} \right) is the mass stopping power ratio of the medium to the gas. Chambers are calibrated against primary standards, such as those from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), ensuring traceability for photon and electron beams. Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) function as passive detectors where excites electrons in crystalline materials, such as (LiF), trapping them in metastable states and storing proportional to the absorbed dose. Upon subsequent heating, these electrons recombine, releasing the stored as thermoluminescent , whose intensity is measured and calibrated to dose in Gy using a reader system. TLDs, like the common TLD-100, are particularly suited for personal and dosimetry due to their small size and tissue equivalence. Film dosimetry utilizes radiographic or radiochromic films, where induces chemical changes that alter , correlating with absorbed dose. In traditional radiographic films, crystals are reduced to metallic silver, darkening the film; modern radiochromic films, such as Gafchromic EBT3, rely on of a , producing a color change measurable via scanning without chemical processing. These films provide high for dose mapping in two dimensions and are calibrated against known doses for relative or absolute measurements. Calorimeters offer the most direct absolute measurement by quantifying the temperature rise in an absorbing medium, such as water or graphite, resulting from radiation-induced heat deposition, as absorbed dose is fundamentally energy per unit mass. For water calorimetry, the dose DD is calculated from the temperature change ΔT\Delta T using D=cΔTD = c \Delta T, where cc is the specific heat capacity of water (approximately 4186 J/kg·°C), adjusted for heat transfer and radiation chemical effects; a typical ΔT\Delta T of 2.389 × 10^{-4} °C corresponds to 1 Gy. These devices serve as primary standards at facilities like NIST for high-precision dosimetry in megavoltage beams. Despite their utility, direct measurement methods have limitations including energy dependence, where response varies with radiation quality, requiring spectrum-specific corrections; angular sensitivity in non-isotropic fields; and the need for rigorous against IAEA or NIST standards to achieve uncertainties below 1-2%. Ionization chambers may suffer from recombination losses at high dose rates, TLDs exhibit fading of stored signal over time, films are affected by processing inconsistencies and limited , and calorimeters demand sophisticated thermal isolation to minimize environmental perturbations.

Computational Methods

Computational methods for calculating absorbed dose are essential in scenarios where direct measurement is infeasible, such as in heterogeneous tissues or complex geometries, relying on numerical simulations to model radiation transport and energy deposition. These approaches provide high accuracy for radiation therapy planning and protection assessments by solving transport equations or using statistical sampling to predict dose distributions. Monte Carlo simulations represent a probabilistic approach to absorbed dose calculation, employing particle transport codes to stochastically track individual radiation particles through matter and tally their energy depositions in specified volumes. Widely adopted codes include MCNP, developed by for general-purpose neutron, photon, and electron transport, and , an open-source toolkit from that models interactions across a broad energy range for medical and high-energy physics applications. These simulations account for detailed physics processes like , photoelectric absorption, and , enabling precise dose estimates in irregular phantoms or patient anatomies. For instance, in radiotherapy, Monte Carlo methods can simulate millions of particle histories to achieve statistical convergence, with typical run times optimized through variance reduction techniques. In contrast, deterministic methods solve the linear Boltzmann transport equation (LBTE) analytically or numerically to compute fluence distributions for photons and electrons, followed by application of mass energy absorption coefficients to derive absorbed dose. The LBTE describes particle angular flux evolution under collision and streaming terms, discretized via finite-difference or finite-element schemes on voxelized grids for efficient computation in clinical settings. These grid-based solvers, such as those implemented in Acuros XB, offer faster execution than —often by orders of magnitude—while handling heterogeneity through material-dependent cross-sections, though they may require approximations for low-energy electrons. Seminal advancements include multi-group discretizations that balance accuracy and speed for megavoltage beams. Treatment planning systems in integrate these methods to generate dose-volume histograms (), which quantify the volume of target or organ-at-risk tissues receiving specific dose levels, and support optimization algorithms for conformal delivery. DVH-based evaluation assesses quality by metrics like D95 (dose covering 95% of the planning target volume) or V20 (volume receiving 20 Gy), with inverse planning iteratively adjusting beam intensities via or to meet clinical constraints. Modern systems combine or deterministic engines with fast pencil-beam approximations for real-time feedback, ensuring doses conform to tumor shapes while sparing adjacent structures. Key factors influencing computational accuracy include tissue heterogeneity, which alters electron equilibrium and requires corrections for density variations in or ; beam quality, defined by energy spectrum and flattening filter effects that impact depth-dose profiles; and buildup regions, where transient charged particle equilibrium leads to surface dose underestimation without proper modeling. These elements necessitate patient-specific CT-derived material assignments and beam commissioning to minimize discrepancies. Validation of computational methods involves benchmarking against direct ionization chamber measurements in calibrated phantoms, with uncertainty analyses quantifying statistical (e.g., from finite histories) and systematic (e.g., cross-section libraries) errors, typically achieving ±2-5% for clinical radiotherapy applications. Such comparisons confirm agreement within 2% in homogeneous media and up to 5% in heterogeneous cases, guiding acceptance criteria for treatment plans.

Biological Effects

Deterministic Effects

Deterministic effects, also known as tissue reactions, are biological responses to exposure that occur only above a specific absorbed dose threshold, below which no observable effect is expected; above the threshold, the severity of increases with higher doses. These effects primarily result from the killing or dysfunction of a large number of cells in affected tissues, leading to observable clinical outcomes such as organ impairment. Unlike probabilistic risks, deterministic effects are predictable and dose-dependent once the threshold is exceeded. The primary mechanisms underlying deterministic effects involve direct ionization of cellular components, particularly DNA, causing strand breaks that overwhelm repair pathways and trigger cell death. Indirect damage arises from the radiolysis of water molecules, producing reactive free radicals that further oxidize DNA, proteins, and lipids, amplifying cellular injury. At higher doses, vascular changes such as endothelial damage and inflammation contribute to tissue hypoxia and necrosis, exacerbating cell loss in radiosensitive organs. A prominent manifestation of deterministic effects is (ARS), which develops following whole-body or partial-body exposure to absorbed doses exceeding approximately 1 Gy, with symptoms varying by dose level. ARS progresses through four stages: the prodromal phase (hours to days post-exposure), characterized by , , and ; the latent phase (days to weeks), a temporary period; the manifest illness phase (weeks to months), marked by organ-specific damage like or ; and recovery or death, depending on dose and medical intervention. The (LD50/30) for whole-body exposure, resulting in 50% mortality within 30 days without treatment, is approximately 4 Gy. Tissue-specific thresholds for deterministic effects reflect varying radiosensitivities; for instance, , leading to and increased infection risk, occurs at 2-6 Gy whole-body dose. Gastrointestinal syndrome, involving mucosal denudation, severe diarrhea, and , emerges at thresholds of 6-10 Gy, often fatal without supportive care. Cerebrovascular effects, such as and neurological deficits, require doses exceeding 20 Gy, typically resulting in rapid . An example of a lower-threshold effect is skin , appearing above 2 Gy, manifesting as transient redness due to vascular dilation and inflammation. Dose-rate influences the severity of deterministic effects, as higher rates deliver faster than cellular repair mechanisms can respond, reducing sublethal repair and increasing overall tissue injury compared to protracted exposures. For equivalent total doses, acute high-rate exposures (e.g., >0.1 Gy/min) thus lower effective thresholds and heighten risks of syndromes like ARS.

Stochastic Effects

Stochastic effects of are biological consequences in which the probability of occurrence, rather than the severity, increases with the absorbed dose, with no assumed threshold below which the is zero. This relationship is modeled by the linear no-threshold (LNT) model, which posits a proportional increase in even at low doses of , such as those measured in grays (Gy). The LNT model underpins radiological protection standards, assuming that the from absorbed dose is directly extrapolable from higher-dose epidemiological data. The primary stochastic effect is cancer induction, where absorbed doses to specific tissues elevate the likelihood of malignancies over time. For instance, studies of atomic bomb survivors in the Life Span Study (LSS) demonstrate an excess relative risk (ERR) for of approximately 2.5 per Gy to the , with detectable increases at doses as low as 0.1 Gy. Solid tumors, such as those in the or , show a lower but still linear ERR, estimated at around 0.5 per Gy for whole-body exposure to low-linear energy transfer (low-LET) radiation like gamma rays. Overall, the lifetime risk of radiation-induced fatal cancer is quantified at about 5% per Gy for low-LET whole-body absorbed doses in adults, though this varies by age, sex, and organ. Hereditary effects represent another category of stochastic risks, arising from in germ cells that can be transmitted to offspring, potentially causing genetic disorders. The estimated risk for severe hereditary effects, such as autosomal dominant diseases, is approximately 0.2% per Gy of absorbed dose to the gonads, based on data extrapolated to humans due to limited direct human evidence. This risk is considered across all generations and contributes minimally to total detriment compared to cancer, at about 1-2% of overall burden. The LNT model for stochastic effects is supported by LSS data showing dose-dependent excesses in cancer without a clear threshold, though debates persist regarding possible adaptive responses or thresholds at very low doses below 0.1 Gy. Despite these discussions, LNT remains the conservative basis for protection, as validated by UNSCEAR analyses of survivor cohorts. Latency periods for manifestation vary: leukemia typically emerges 2-10 years post-exposure, while solid tumors have longer latencies of 10-40 years or more.

Medical Applications

Radiation Therapy

In radiation therapy, absorbed dose is meticulously planned and delivered to eradicate cancer cells while minimizing exposure to surrounding healthy tissues. employs linear accelerators (LINACs) to generate high-energy beams that deposit absorbed dose in targeted tumor volumes. These devices accelerate electrons to produce X-rays, which are shaped and directed from multiple angles using multileaf collimators for precise dose distributions. Techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) enhance conformality by modulating beam intensity and gantry rotation, respectively, achieving superior target coverage and organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing compared to conventional methods. Brachytherapy complements external beam approaches by placing radioactive sources directly within or adjacent to the tumor, enabling high local absorbed doses with rapid fall-off to spare distant tissues. Common regimens deliver 40-70 Gy to the tumor volume, for example, in treatments of lip cancer, typical HDR brachytherapy doses of 40-60 Gy in multiple fractions balance local control with risks of ulceration, which increase above 70 Gy. High-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy, using afterloading systems with sources, achieves these doses in short sessions (e.g., >12 Gy per hour), optimizing therapeutic ratios through dose gradients. Dose prescriptions in typically specify total absorbed doses of 40-70 Gy to the tumor, delivered in fractions of 1.8-2 Gy to exploit the linear-quadratic model of cell survival and reduce late toxicity. This schedule, often spanning 4-7 weeks, balances tumor control with normal tissue recovery, while OAR constraints—such as maximum doses to (<45 Gy) or lungs (mean <20 Gy)—guide planning to prevent deterministic effects. Margins around the gross tumor volume define the planning target volume, ensuring adequate coverage despite setup uncertainties. To compare fractionation schemes, the biologically effective dose (BED) normalizes absorbed dose to an equivalent infinite fractionation regimen: BED=nd(1+dα/β)\text{BED} = nd \left(1 + \frac{d}{\alpha/\beta}\right) where nn is the number of fractions, dd is the dose per fraction, and α/β\alpha/\beta is a tissue-specific parameter (typically 10 Gy for tumors and 3 Gy for late-responding normal tissues). This metric aids in optimizing schedules, such as hypofractionation for certain tumors where higher dd values yield equivalent or superior BEDs with fewer sessions. Emerging techniques as of 2025, such as FLASH radiotherapy delivering absorbed doses at ultra-high dose rates (>40 Gy/s), and single-fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) (e.g., 54 Gy for early-stage ), aim to enhance therapeutic ratios by minimizing normal tissue damage while achieving tumor control. Key challenges in optimizing absorbed dose delivery include tumor hypoxia, which reduces by limiting oxygen-dependent DNA damage, often requiring 2-3 times higher doses for equivalent cell kill in hypoxic regions. Adaptive replanning addresses anatomical changes during treatment, such as tumor shrinkage or , by reimaging and adjusting dose distributions mid-course to maintain precision and efficacy.

Diagnostic Imaging

In diagnostic imaging, absorbed dose refers to the energy deposited per unit mass of tissue from used to produce medical images, typically at low levels to visualize anatomy without causing immediate harm. These procedures, including , computed tomography (CT), and , involve X-rays that deliver absorbed doses on the order of milligrays (mGy), far below therapeutic levels. The primary concern is minimizing exposure to reduce the of effects, such as cancer induction, which may occur at low doses without a threshold. Conventional , used for bones, chest, and extremities, delivers typical absorbed doses of 0.01–0.1 mGy per , depending on the anatomical and projection; for example, a posteroanterior results in an average organ-absorbed dose of about 0.07 mGy to the lungs. Key factors influencing the absorbed dose include tube voltage (kVp), which affects penetration and beam quality, and tube current-time product (mAs), which determines the number of X-rays produced and thus the overall exposure. Higher kVp settings reduce patient dose by increasing beam efficiency while requiring adjustments in mAs to maintain . CT scans provide cross-sectional images and involve higher absorbed doses than plain radiography, typically 5–20 mGy as measured by the volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) for a single-phase chest or scan. Multiphase CT, such as for staging with contrast-enhanced phases, can increase the total absorbed dose to 20–50 mGy or more due to repeated exposures over the same region. Dose reduction techniques, including algorithms, enable up to 50–80% lower radiation while preserving diagnostic image quality by statistically refining noisy data from reduced exposures. Fluoroscopy, employed for real-time guidance in procedures like catheterizations, results in cumulative absorbed doses that can reach 20–50 mGy per minute at the skin entrance during continuous imaging, with total procedure doses varying widely based on duration and complexity. Interventional procedures, such as , pose elevated risks due to prolonged times, potentially leading to deterministic skin effects if skin doses exceed 5–10 Gy, though most remain below 1 Gy. Dose assessment in CT relies on standardized metrics: CTDIvol quantifies the average absorbed dose within a scanned volume (in mGy), while the dose-length product (DLP) multiplies CTDIvol by scan length (in mGy·cm) to estimate total energy imparted. These metrics facilitate comparison across scanners and protocols, aiding in optimization. The ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle, endorsed by the (ICRP), guides diagnostic imaging by requiring justification of procedures and optimization of doses through techniques like beam collimation and protocol adjustments, without applying strict dose limits to patients but using diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) to benchmark typical exposures. For non-therapeutic exposures, ICRP emphasizes monitoring cumulative doses, recommending investigation if effective doses approach 100 mSv from recurrent imaging to assess risks.

Industrial and Other Applications

Food Irradiation

employs controlled absorbed doses of to eliminate pathogens, inhibit spoilage organisms, and extend the of various food products, thereby enhancing and reducing post-harvest losses. This process targets biological contaminants without significantly altering the food's nutritional value or sensory qualities when doses are appropriately managed. The primary radiation types used are gamma rays, beams, and X-rays, each selected based on the food's , , and required . Gamma , the most common method for bulk processing, utilizes radioactive isotopes such as or cesium-137 as sources, which emit penetrating gamma rays capable of treating pallet-sized loads of fruits, vegetables, spices, and meats. Electron beam , generated by linear accelerators, provides high-dose rates and is suitable for thinner products like surface-treated or grains, offering the advantage of switching the source on and off for precise control. , produced by directing beams onto a metal target, combines the penetration of gamma rays with the flexibility of electron beams, making it effective for densely packaged s. Absorbed doses in food irradiation are categorized by purpose and intensity: low doses, up to 1 kGy, primarily inhibit sprouting in tubers and bulbs or delay in fruits; medium doses, ranging from 1 to 10 kGy, facilitate disinfestation by eliminating insects and parasites while reducing microbial loads in , meats, and fresh ; and high doses, exceeding 10 kGy, achieve sterilization for shelf-stable products like spices or ready-to-eat meals by inactivating even resistant spores. These levels ensure effective microbial reduction proportional to the dose absorbed, with the unit of gray (Gy) measuring deposition per of food. To maintain efficacy and quality, dose uniformity is critical, achieved through dose mapping that positions dosimeters—such as or dichromate films—throughout the load to measure absorbed dose distribution and verify that the maximum-to-minimum dose remains with a dose uniformity (D_max/D_min) typically less than 3:1. This mapping simulates product geometry and conveyor paths, allowing adjustments in source positioning or load configuration to optimize uniformity, particularly in gamma facilities where dose gradients can vary significantly. Dosimeters are calibrated against national standards to ensure and accuracy in validating the process. Regulatory frameworks, established by organizations like the (WHO) and (FAO) through the Commission, endorse up to an overall average absorbed dose of 10 kGy for most purposes, with higher doses permitted only when demonstrated necessary for safety or technological reasons, provided no adverse effects occur. Irradiated foods must be labeled with the international symbol—a stylized flower in a —and a statement such as "Treated with " to inform consumers, applying to retail packages but exempting bulk ingredients if the final product is not further irradiated. These standards harmonize global trade while prioritizing safety assessments.

Material Processing

In industrial material processing, absorbed dose is applied to modify structures through cross-linking, where electron beam at doses of 10–100 kGy enhances mechanical strength and thermal resistance in applications such as cable insulation and components. This process creates intermolecular bonds in polymers like , improving durability without chemical initiators and enabling the production of heat-shrinkable materials for electrical connections. For sterilization of disposable items, such as syringes and tubing, absorbed doses of 25–40 kGy delivered by gamma rays or beams achieve a (SAL) of 10−610^{-6}, reducing microbial survival probability to one in a million. These doses are validated per international standards to ensure product integrity while eliminating pathogens. Controlled degradation uses higher absorbed doses of 50–200 kGy to break chains, promoting waste reduction by converting recalcitrant materials like into manageable fragments for or disposal. This targeted scission contrasts with cross-linking and is particularly useful for of . Radiation source selection influences treatment efficacy due to penetration differences: 10 MeV beams achieve depths of approximately 38–50 mm in unit-density materials, ideal for thin or surface modifications, while gamma rays enable uniform dosing in bulk items exceeding several centimeters. Facilities like Nordion's gamma irradiation plants support economic viability through high throughput, processing millions of cubic meters annually and contributing over $85 billion (as of 2011) in global product value via efficient, energy-saving operations compared to traditional methods.

Radiation Protection

Component Survivability

Component in environments refers to the ability of electronic and mechanical components to withstand absorbed doses of without functional degradation or failure. Absorbed dose, measured in grays (Gy), quantifies the energy deposited per unit mass, and exceeding survivability thresholds leads to deterministic in components like semiconductors. In harsh settings such as , components must tolerate cumulative total ionizing dose (TID) effects, where generates electron-hole pairs in insulating layers, causing charge trapping and interface defects that alter device performance. TID primarily affects semiconductors through cumulative , leading to shifts in metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs). For instance, in silicon-based MOSFETs, positive charge buildup in the can shift the by several volts at absorbed doses of 10-100 Gy(Si), depending on thickness and processing; thinner oxides in modern devices exhibit higher sensitivity. This shift arises from hole trapping in the , which effectively increases the gate voltage required to turn on the device, potentially rendering it inoperable if the change exceeds operational margins. Key failure modes include oxide-trapped charge accumulation and the creation of interface states at the silicon-oxide boundary, which increase leakage currents and degrade . Oxide-trapped positive charge dominates initial shifts, while interface states, acting as traps for charge carriers, contribute to long-term leakage paths, with currents rising by orders of magnitude beyond 50 Gy in unhardened devices. These effects are evaluated through standardized testing protocols, such as MIL-STD-883 Method 1019, which specifies irradiation procedures to assess TID tolerance up to specified levels, including bias conditions and post-irradiation annealing to simulate operational recovery. In space applications, solar flares pose acute threats, delivering absorbed doses up to 100 Gy(Si) to unshielded electronics during major events, such as the 1972 August flare, which exceeded 10 Gy in low-Earth orbit. To ensure survivability, components are qualified to at least 300 krad(Si) (equivalent to 3000 Gy(Si)), often through margin testing that accounts for mission duration and shielding; this threshold protects against both solar particle events and trapped radiation in Van Allen belts. Mitigation testing for hardness assurance typically employs gamma sources, which simulate TID effects with penetrating 1.17-1.33 MeV photons at dose rates of 0.1-1 Gy(Si)/s, allowing controlled exposure to verify component limits. This method correlates well with space radiation spectra and includes annotated bias testing to reveal worst-case degradation, followed by thermal annealing at 100°C to assess recovery. Dose-rate considerations are critical, as high-dose-rate exposures (e.g., >0.01 Gy/s during flares) produce prompt effects like immediate charge generation and transient currents, while low-dose-rate environments (e.g., <10^{-3} Gy/s in deep space) enable annealing recovery, where trapped charges recombine over time. However, some bipolar technologies exhibit enhanced low-dose-rate sensitivity (ELDRS), where degradation worsens at lower rates due to slower charge neutralization, necessitating hybrid testing approaches to predict long-term survivability.

Radiation Hardening

Radiation hardening encompasses engineering strategies to mitigate the effects of absorbed dose on electronic systems, particularly in high-radiation environments such as and nuclear facilities. These techniques aim to maintain functionality by reducing total ionizing dose (TID) accumulation and single-event effects (SEE) through proactive design choices, rather than relying solely on post-exposure repairs. Key approaches include , shielding integration, and specialized circuit architectures that enhance tolerance without compromising overall system performance excessively. Shielding is a primary method to attenuate incoming particles, thereby lowering the absorbed dose within protected components. High-density materials like effectively block gamma rays and heavy ions due to their high , while low-density hydrogen-rich materials such as excel at moderating neutrons through . In space applications, multilayer configurations often combine these, with encasing to address both charged particles and neutrons from cosmic rays. The of intensity II through a shield of thickness xx follows the exponential law I=I0e−μxI = I_0 e^{-\mu x}, where I0I_0 is the initial intensity and μ\mu is the linear specific to the material and type; this model enables precise shielding thickness calculations for mission-specific dose limits. Circuit design techniques under radiation-hardened by design (RHBD) focus on layout modifications to minimize charge collection and leakage paths induced by . Guard rings, typically n+/p+ diffusions surrounding sensitive transistors, isolate parasitic structures to prevent from ion strikes, while enclosed transistor geometries—such as edgeless layouts—eliminate vulnerable edges that could collect radiation-generated charges. These RHBD methods, implemented in processes, can achieve SEE immunity up to (LET) thresholds exceeding 100 MeV·cm²/mg without altering the core fabrication. Advanced materials like wide-bandgap semiconductors further bolster tolerance by leveraging higher displacement energies and reduced carrier generation under irradiation. (), with its 3.26 eV bandgap, demonstrates exceptional resilience, as evidenced by 4H-SiC CMOS transimpedance amplifiers retaining functionality after gamma doses over 1 MGy (Si), far surpassing silicon-based devices limited to around 100 kGy. This tolerance arises from SiC's , minimizing defect formation and shifts in high-dose scenarios. Such hardening techniques find critical applications in nuclear reactors, where electronics must endure and gamma fluxes, and in satellites exposed to galactic cosmic rays. For instance, the PowerPC microprocessor, deployed in missions like Mars rovers and deep-space probes, is rated for 1 Mrad(Si) TID, enabling reliable operation in orbits with accumulated doses up to 300 krad over multi-year durations. Implementing involves inherent trade-offs in system attributes. Enhanced shielding and RHBD layouts increase component size and weight, potentially constraining payload capacity, while wide-bandgap materials like SiC raise power dissipation due to higher operating voltages despite improved efficiency. These modifications elevate costs—often by factors of 10–100 compared to parts—through specialized fabrication and validation, yet they significantly boost reliability, reducing failure rates in mission-critical environments from near-certain to below 1% over operational lifetimes. Balancing these factors requires mission-specific optimization to ensure dose tolerance aligns with performance goals.

Equivalent Dose

The equivalent dose HTH_T to a tissue or organ TT is calculated by multiplying the mean absorbed dose DTD_T in that tissue by the radiation weighting factor wRw_R, which adjusts for the varying biological effectiveness of different types of ionizing radiation in inducing stochastic health effects: HT=DT×wRH_T = D_T \times w_R This quantity provides a measure of the biological damage from radiation exposure, beyond the purely physical energy deposition captured by absorbed dose. The unit of equivalent dose is the sievert (Sv), defined as 1 joule per kilogram (J/kg), identical in dimension to the gray (Gy) for absorbed dose but weighted to reflect biological impact. The radiation weighting factors wRw_R are dimensionless and recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in Publication 103 (2007). For photons, electrons, and muons of all energies, wR=1w_R = 1; for protons and charged pions with energies greater than 2 MeV, wR=2w_R = 2; for alpha particles, fission fragments, and heavy ions, wR=20w_R = 20; and for neutrons, wRw_R varies continuously with energy from about 2.5 at low energies to a maximum of about 20 at around 1 MeV, then decreasing to about 5.0 at high energies above 20 MeV. These values are derived from the relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of radiations for stochastic effects, such as cancer and heritable diseases, based on experimental data from cellular and animal studies, and represent conservative approximations averaged across biological endpoints. In , is essential for evaluating risks from mixed radiation fields, where different particle types contribute unequally to biological harm; for instance, in neutron therapy for certain cancers, the wRw_R for neutrons (typically 5–20) amplifies the effective exposure by a factor of up to 20 compared to equivalent absorbed doses from photons, guiding treatment planning and shielding requirements. However, wRw_R values are inherently approximate, as RBE can vary with , , and specific biological context, and is designed for low-dose in protection scenarios rather than high-dose deterministic effects like tissue .

Effective Dose

The effective dose is a radiation protection quantity that provides an estimate of the stochastic health risk to the whole body from non-uniform or partial-body exposures by summing the equivalent doses to individual tissues weighted by their relative radiosensitivities. It is defined by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) as E=∑TwTHTE = \sum_T w_T H_T, where EE is the effective dose in sieverts (Sv), HTH_T is the equivalent dose to tissue or organ TT in Sv, and wTw_T is the tissue weighting factor representing the relative contribution of that tissue to overall detriment from stochastic effects. This quantity allows for the summation of risks from exposures to different tissues as if they were uniformly distributed across the body. Tissue weighting factors wTw_T are dimensionless values assigned by the ICRP based on detriment from cancer induction and heritable effects, with the sum over all tissues equaling 1. In ICRP 103 (2007), examples include 0.12 for the lungs (due to high cancer risk), 0.12 for the (red), and 0.01 for the skin (lower sensitivity); other values are 0.08 for the gonads and 0.04 each for organs such as the , oesophagus, liver, and . These factors were updated from prior recommendations to reflect improved epidemiological data on organ-specific risks. The primary purpose of effective dose is to enable comparisons of risks between different types of exposures, such as medical procedures or occupational limits, by normalizing partial exposures to an equivalent whole-body uniform exposure. For instance, a typical abdominal delivers an effective dose of approximately 10 mSv, comparable to about three years of natural exposure at the global average of roughly 3 mSv per year. For calculations, if the exposure is uniform across the whole body, the effective dose approximates the whole-body equivalent dose since the weighting factors sum to unity. For partial or non-uniform exposures, the effective dose is computed by applying the weighting factors only to the exposed tissues (with HT=0H_T = 0 for unexposed ones) and scaling accordingly, often using computational phantoms to estimate organ doses from measured air kerma or other metrics. Criticisms of the effective dose concept include its oversimplification of risks from non-uniform fields, as the fixed weighting factors do not fully capture spatial variations in exposure or interactions between irradiated and unirradiated tissues. Additionally, the age-independent weighting factors fail to account for heightened pediatric sensitivities—such as up to fivefold higher in children compared to adults per unit dose—necessitating updates for age-specific models in vulnerable populations.

Historical Development

Early Concepts

The foundations of absorbed dose concepts emerged in the late with the discovery of X-rays by Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen in , who observed that these invisible rays could penetrate opaque materials and in gases, laying the groundwork for quantifying energy deposition effects. Röntgen's experiments demonstrated that X-rays caused electrical discharge in charged electroscopes, providing an initial method to measure intensity through . In 1896, discovered natural in salts, revealing spontaneous emissions that similarly ionized air and discharged electroscopes, prompting further exploration of 's interaction with matter beyond visible fluorescence. These early detections relied on electroscopes to gauge the rate of as a proxy for strength, though without direct linkage to energy absorbed in biological tissues. In the early 20th century, Ernest Rutherford and James Chadwick advanced understanding through studies of alpha and beta particles from radioactive decay. Beta rays were identified as electrons around 1900, while alpha rays were confirmed as helium nuclei by Rutherford and Thomas Royds in 1909. Their research introduced the concept of specific ionization, defined as the number of ion pairs produced per unit path length of a charged particle, which correlated with energy loss along the particle's track and provided a basis for estimating radiation's penetrating power. Rutherford's investigations, detailed in his 1913 book Radioactive Substances and Their Radiations, quantified this energy dissipation, noting that approximately 32-35 electron volts were required to produce each ion pair in air, bridging particle physics to dosimetry precursors. During the 1920s and 1930s, efforts to apply these ideas to medical contexts intensified, with Edith H. Quimby developing practical methods to express tissue dose in roentgens, a unit initially defined by in air but adapted for estimating exposure in soft tissues through phantom models and dosage tables. Quimby's work at Memorial Hospital in New York standardized and applications, emphasizing the roentgen as a measure of potential tissue effect despite variations in absorption. Concurrently, J.A. Crowther's 1924 target theory posited that radiation's biological damage resulted from energy hits on discrete cellular targets, modeling survival curves exponentially with dose and linking absorbed energy to probabilistic inactivation of vital structures like chromosomes. In the World War II era, the Manhattan Project accelerated dosimetry for nuclear operations, employing ionization chambers—cylindrical devices filled with gas to measure charge from radiation-induced ions—for monitoring worker exposure and ensuring criticality safety in fissile material handling. These chambers quantified gamma and neutron fields in real-time, informing safety protocols at sites like Oak Ridge and Hanford, where early film badges supplemented ionization readings to track cumulative doses. However, pre-1950 concepts predominantly emphasized exposure via air ionization, such as the roentgen unit, rather than precise absorbed energy in heterogeneous tissues, revealing limitations in accounting for material-specific energy transfer.

Modern Standardization

The modern standardization of absorbed dose began in the mid-20th century with efforts to establish consistent units and measurement protocols amid growing applications in and medicine. The rad as the unit of absorbed dose was defined by the International Commission on Radiological Units and Measurements (ICRU) in 1953 as 100 ergs per gram of material. This was adopted by the U.S. National Committee on (NCRP) in its 1954 Handbook 59 on permissible doses from external sources of . The British physicist Louis Harold Gray (1905–1965) made fundamental contributions to , including the principle that absorbed dose is the energy imparted by per unit mass of matter, influencing the formal definitions of the era. The first International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of , held in in 1955, featured dedicated sessions on , including discussions on absorbed dose measurement techniques for isotopes and sources, which helped disseminate emerging standards among global experts. Building on this foundation, the (ICRP) formally endorsed the rad in its Publication 1, released in 1959, as part of comprehensive recommendations for radiological protection that emphasized absorbed dose as a key quantity for limiting exposure. By the 1970s, the push toward the (SI) gained momentum. In 1975, the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) recommended adopting the joule per kilogram (J/kg) as the base unit for absorbed dose, proposing the special name "gray" (Gy) for 1 J/kg to align with SI principles and facilitate global consistency. This recommendation was ratified by the 15th General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM) in the same year, formally defining the gray as the SI unit of absorbed dose. The 1980s marked the effective transition to SI units in practice, supported by international organizations. The gray was implemented through a 10-year transition period starting in 1975, with widespread adoption by the mid-1980s; for instance, the (IAEA) incorporated the gray into its safety standards and protocols for , while the (WHO) promoted its use in health guidelines to harmonize global reporting. In the , efforts focused on harmonizing standards for clinical applications, particularly in radiotherapy. The IAEA developed codes of practice, such as TRS-277 (1987, revised in the ), to standardize absorbed dose determination in and beams, ensuring to primary standards and reducing inter-institutional variations in therapy . Post-2000 developments emphasized refinements for complex scenarios and computational methods. The ICRP's Publication 103, published in 2007, updated the radiological protection framework, including tissue weighting factors that rely on absorbed dose as the foundational quantity, to better account for risks in low-dose exposures. In the , simulation techniques became integral to standardization, enabling precise modeling of particle transport for reference ; for example, protocols like IAEA TRS-483 (2017) incorporated -calculated corrections for detector-specific effects in small-field measurements, enhancing accuracy in modern radiotherapy. More recently, in the , digital and computational standards have advanced, with IAEA TRS-483 providing guidelines for small static fields used in , addressing challenges in high-precision . Additionally, the ICRP's Task Group 91, active since the early and reporting progress in 2023, is evaluating low-dose and low-dose-rate risk inference, including metrics for absorbed dose in protection contexts to refine future standards.

References

  1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK201992/
  2. https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-terms-and-units
  3. https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/medical-x-ray-imaging/radiation-quantities-and-units
  4. https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/gray-gy
  5. https://www2.lbl.gov/abc/wallchart/chapters/15/2.html
  6. https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/rad-radiation-absorbed-dose
  7. https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/health-effects/measuring-radiation
  8. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ionizing-radiation-and-health-effects
  9. https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-health-effects
  10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK218702/
  11. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9155/20/6/016
  12. https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses
  13. https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/lethal-dose-ld
  14. https://xdb.lbl.gov/Section5/Sec_5-4.pdf
  15. https://www.aapm.org/meetings/2014AM/ReviewCourses/documents/T06MaMeasurementchapter.pdf
  16. https://www.iaea.org/resources/hhc/medical-physics/radiotherapy/dosimetry
  17. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1122/ML11229A698.pdf
  18. https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=901164
  19. https://www.aapm.org/meetings/09ss/documents/23soares-radiochromicfilm.pdf
  20. https://www.nist.gov/programs-projects/calibrations-water-calorimetry-primary-standards-absorbed-dose-water
  21. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/15/6806
  22. https://mcnp.lanl.gov/
  23. https://ro-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13014-018-1065-3
  24. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6560/aaf0e2
  25. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3771252/
  26. https://tro.amegroups.org/article/view/9838/html
  27. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360301698004921
  28. https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/rpt_85.pdf
  29. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9155/60/19/7637/pdf
  30. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00259-018-4136-7
  31. https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%20118
  32. https://www.cdc.gov/radiation-emergencies/hcp/clinical-guidance/ars.html
  33. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK597563/
  34. https://remm.hhs.gov/ars.htm
  35. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2018/02/f48/dose-ranges-chart.pdf
  36. https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/initiative-reduce-unnecessary-radiation-exposure-medical-imaging/radiation-dose-quality-assurance-questions-and-answers
  37. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9630203/
  38. https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%20147
  39. https://www.iarc.who.int/news-events/leukaemia-lymphoma-and-multiple-myeloma-mortality-after-low-level-exposure-to-ionising-radiation-in-nuclear-workers-inworks/
  40. https://www.rerf.or.jp/en/programs/roadmap_e/health_effects-en/late-en/leukemia/
  41. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2235592100
  42. https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%20152
  43. https://www.unscear.org/unscear/uploads/documents/publications/UNSCEAR_2001_Annex.pdf
  44. https://www.unscear.org/unscear/uploads/documents/unscear-reports/UNSCEAR_2024_Report_Vol.I.pdf
  45. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6498/acdfd7
  46. https://radiopaedia.org/articles/radiation-induced-carcinogenesis?lang=us
  47. https://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info/linac
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3473700/
  49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4300360/
  50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physo.2022.100109
  51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13046-021-02000-x
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9600677/
  53. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3473681/
  54. https://www.cancertodaymag.org/spring-2025/radiation-therapy-flash/
  55. https://www.newswise.com/articles/single-dose-of-radiation-as-effective-as-5-week-course-for-lung-cancer-roswell-park-shares-results-at-astro
  56. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6582242/
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10968833/
  58. https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%20135
  59. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28981835/
  60. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK564352/
  61. https://radiopaedia.org/articles/kilovoltage-peak?lang=us
  62. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33475510/
  63. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3841128/
  64. https://www.physicamedica.com/article/S1120-1797%2820%2930260-X/fulltext
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7509020/
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6940005/
  67. https://radiopaedia.org/articles/ct-dose-index-1?lang=us
  68. https://www.icrp.org/docs/rad_for_gp_for_web.pdf
  69. https://www.fda.gov/food/buy-store-serve-safe-food/food-irradiation-what-you-need-know
  70. https://www.epa.gov/radtown/food-irradiation
  71. https://www.fda.gov/food/irradiation-food-packaging/overview-irradiation-food-and-packaging
  72. https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/TRS409_scr.pdf
  73. https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/te_1617_web.pdf
  74. https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/21/042/21042969.pdf
  75. https://www.irradiationpanel.org/app/download/3792773/IAEA%2BGuide%2BIndustrial%2BRadiation%2BProcessing%2B2011.pdf
  76. https://www.nordion.com/products/irradiation-systems/
  77. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20030032300/downloads/20030032300.pdf
  78. https://indico.cern.ch/event/635099/contributions/2570674/attachments/1456398/2248961/Radiation_Effects_and_RHA_ESA_Course_9-10_May_2017_TID_MP_FINAL.pdf
  79. https://llis.nasa.gov/lesson/824
  80. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19990116210/downloads/19990116210.pdf
  81. https://nepp.nasa.gov/docuploads/A6B8B953-E2DD-4D92-AB8A873A04F0B10A/NSREC02_SC_Poivey.pdf
  82. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-C13-347e9b8f73229b7dd3fff733f93556bc/pdf/GOVPUB-C13-347e9b8f73229b7dd3fff733f93556bc.pdf
  83. https://uspas.fnal.gov/materials/19NewMexico/Radiation/lecture_0.pdf
  84. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20070036667/downloads/20070036667.pdf
  85. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20140002469/downloads/20140002469.pdf
  86. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19760009085/downloads/19760009085.pdf
  87. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1032546/m2/1/high_res_d/4659693.pdf
  88. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4558870
  89. https://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/ipm2012/pdf/1095.pdf
  90. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8930609
  91. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20250006656/downloads/NIAC_2019_PhI_Howe_SPEAR.pdf
  92. http://vivapowerpc.eu/docs/rad750.pdf
  93. https://parts.jpl.nasa.gov/asic/Sect.3.4.html
  94. https://www.montana.edu/blameres/vitae/students/student_002_Nimmakayala.pdf
  95. https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%20103
  96. https://icrpaedia.org/Absorbed%2C_Equivalent%2C_and_Effective_Dose
  97. https://radiopaedia.org/articles/radiation-weighting-factor?lang=us
  98. https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%2092
  99. https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/medical-x-ray-imaging/what-are-radiation-risks-ct
  100. https://www.icrp.org/docs/David%20Brenner%20Effective%20Dose%20a%20Flawed%20Concept.pdf
  101. https://www.aps.org/apsnews/2001/11/1895-roentgens-discovery-xrays
  102. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1903/becquerel/facts/
  103. https://www.orau.org/health-physics-museum/collection/electroscopes/index.html
  104. https://www.mirion.com/discover/knowledge-hub/articles/education/introduction-to-radiation-detectors
  105. https://www.osti.gov/opennet/manhattan-project-history/Science/Radioactivity/beta.html
  106. https://history.aip.org/exhibits/rutherford/sections/alpha-particles-atom.html
  107. https://web.mit.edu/8.13/8.13c/references-fall/rutherford/segre-ch2-passage-of-radiations-through-matter.pdf
  108. https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/32.5.583
  109. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.1924.0022
  110. https://www.orau.org/blog/history/measuring-radiation-exposure-then-and-now.html
  111. https://www.instadose.com/blog/why-the-dosimeter-was-created
  112. https://journals.viamedica.pl/nowotwory_journal_of_oncology/article/download/NJO.2016.0041/35347
  113. https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/hb/nbshandbook59.pdf
  114. https://www.bipm.org/utils/common/pdf/si-brochure/SI-Brochure-9-EN.pdf
  115. https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%201
  116. https://www.bipm.org/en/committees/cg/cgpm/15-1975/resolution-9
  117. https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/P074_scr.pdf
  118. https://www.icrp.org/icrp_group.asp?id=83
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.