The International Commission on Radiological Protection was founded in 1928 to advance for the public benefit the science of radiological protection. The ICRP provides recommendations and guidance on protection against the risks associated with ionising radiation, from artificial sources as widely used in medicine, general industry and nuclear enterprises, and from naturally occurring sources. These reports and recommendations are published six times each year on behalf of the ICRP as the journal Annals of the ICRP. Each issue provides in-depth coverage of a specific subject area.

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) was established in 1928 to advance the science of radiological protection for the public benefit. The ICRP provides recommendations and guidance on protective measures against the risks associated with ionising radiation from artificial sources, widely used in medicine, general industry, and nuclear enterprises, as well as from naturally occurring sources. These reports and recommendations are published six times a year as the journal Annals of the ICRP, with each issue focusing on a specific subject area, providing in-depth coverage and analysis.

国际放射防护委员会成立于1928年，旨在为公众利益推动放射防护科学的发展。ICRP提供关于防护措施的建议和指导，以应对来自人工源（如医学、工业和核能企业广泛使用的放射性物质）和自然源的电离辐射风险。这些报告和建议每年出版六期，作为期刊《Annals of the ICRP》发布。每期专注于特定主题领域，提供深入的覆盖和分析。

Annals of the ICRP

T. Otto

ICRU Report 95: new operational quantities for external radiation exposure

ICRU报告95：外部辐射暴露的新操作量

Use of medical imaging continues to increase, making the largest contribution to the exposure of populations from artificial sources of radiation worldwide. The principle of optimisation of protection is that 'the likelihood of incurring exposures, the number of people exposed, and the magnitude of their individual doses should all be kept as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), taking into account economic and societal factors'. Optimisation for medical imaging involves more than ALARA - it requires keeping individual patient exposures to the minimum necessary to achieve the required medical objectives. In other words, the type, number, and quality of images must be adequate to obtain the information needed for diagnosis or intervention. Dose reductions for imaging or x-ray-image-guided procedures should not be used if they degrade image quality to the point where the images are inadequate for the clinical purpose. The move to digital imaging has provided versatile acquisition, post-processing, and presentation options, and enabled wide and often immediate availability of image information. However, because images are adjusted for optimal viewing, the appearance may not give any indication if the dose is higher than necessary. Nevertheless, digital images provide opportunities for further optimisation, and allow the application of artificial intelligence methods.Optimisation of radiological protection for digital radiology (radiography, fluoroscopy, and computed tomography) involves selection and installation of equipment, design and construction of facilities, choice of optimal equipment settings, day-to-day methods of operation, quality control programmes, and ensuring that all personnel receive proper initial and career-long training. The radiation dose levels that patients receive also have implications for doses to staff. As new imaging equipment incorporates more options to improve performance, it becomes more complex and less easily understood, so operators have to be given more extensive training. Ongoing monitoring, review, and analysis of performance is required that feeds back into the improvement and development of imaging protocols. Several different aspects relating to optimisation of protection that need to be developed are set out in this publication. The first is collaboration between radiologists/other radiological medical practitioners, radiographers/medical radiation technologists, and medical physicists, each of whom have key skills that can only contribute to the process effectively when individuals work together as a core team. The second is appropriate methodology and technology, with the knowledge and expertise required to use each effectively. The third relates to organisational processes which ensure that required tasks, such as equipment performance tests, patient dose surveys, and review of protocols, are carried out. There is wide variation in equipment, funding, and expertise around the world, and the majority of facilities do not have all the tools, professional teams, and expertise to fully embrace all the possibilities for optimisation. Therefore, this publication sets out broad levels for aspects of optimisation that different facilities might achieve, and through which they can progress incrementally: Level D - preliminary; Level C - basic; Level B - intermediate; and Level A - advanced. Guidance from professional societies can be invaluable in helping users to evaluate systems and aid in adoption of best practice. Examples of systems and activities that should be in place to achieve the different levels are set out. Imaging facilities can then evaluate the arrangements they already have, and use this publication to guide decisions about the next actions to be taken in optimising their imaging services.

Optimisation of Radiological Protection in Digital Radiology Techniques for Medical Imaging

Medical exposures form the largest manmade contributor to total ionising radiation exposure of the UK population. In recent years, new technologies have been developed to improve treatment and prognosis of individuals treated with radiation for diseases such as cancer. However, there is evidence of public, patient, and medical professional concern that radiation protection regulations and practices, as well as understanding of potential long-term adverse health effects of radiation exposure (in the context of other health risks), have not always ‘kept pace’ with technological developments in this field. This is a truly complex, multi-disciplinary problem for the modern world. The ‘Radiation Theme’ of the Public Health England and Newcastle University Health Protection Research Unit on ‘Chemical and Radiation Threats and Hazards’ is addressing this need, with a key focus on a genuinely interdisciplinary approach bringing together world-leading epidemiologists, radiation biologists, clinicians, statisticians, and artists. In addition, the project has a strong grounding in public, patient, and medical professional involvement in research. Similarly, the EU-CONCERT-funded LDLensRad project seeks to understand the mechanisms of action of low-dose ionising radiation in the lens of the eye, and the potential contribution to the development of cataract – in contemporary research, such projects will only be considered successful when they make use of expertise from a variety of fields and when they are able to demonstrate that the outputs are not only of benefit to society, but that society understands and welcomes the benefits. Finally, successful engagement, training, and retention of early career scientists within this field is crucial for sustainability of the research. Herein, the contribution of embedded interdisciplinary working, stakeholder involvement, and training of early career scientists to recent advancements in the field of medical (and wider) radiation protection research is discussed and considered.

E.A. Ainsbury

The 2019 Bo Lindell Laureate Lecture: On the use of interdisciplinary, stakeholder-driven, radiation protection research in support of medical uses of ionising radiation

Biodosimetry is a valuable tool for determining the ionising radiation dose received by exposed individuals. The dicentric chromosome assay and translocation analysis are both standardised methods of biodosimetry which analyse chromosome damage. The dicentric chromosome assay is most suitable for acute exposures in the recent past as the dicentric frequency decreases with time after exposure. Translocation analysis is more appropriate for chronic exposures and older exposures as the translocations are considered stable and long-lasting. For both, analysis of low doses is difficult due to the stochastic nature of the damage and high levels of uncertainty. Complicating matters, confounding factors, such as medical exposures or exposures to heavy metals, have been shown to have an additive or synergistic effect to damage from radiation. For the situation described here, the individuals were welders who were also potentially exposed to both radiation and heavy metals. Biodosimetry was performed on 8 welders who were potentially exposed to ionising radiation during an industrial radiographic procedure using 192 Ir for non-destructive testing. Analysis was performed 4–6 years after the suspected exposures and chromosome damage above expected background levels was detected. Here we discuss the analysis performed, the methods used to estimate whole-body doses and the involvement of confounding factors.

R.C. Wilkins

L.A. Beaton-Green

T. Barr

Ir M.B. Gagnon

N. Fréchette

Y. Dutil

Case study on occupational exposures to radiation with possible co-exposure to heavy metals

职业性辐射暴露与重金属共同暴露的案例研究

The ICRP's current strapline is that of ‘ Protecting people, animals and the environment around the world from the harmful effects of radiation’. But if that is the case, what revisions to its overall framework are necessary in order fully to achieve it? This paper briefly attempts to identify and address some of these questions.

R.J. Pentreath

Protecting animals within a revised radiological protection framework

在修订的辐射防护框架内保护动物

The equivalent dose of body surface can be calculated using a thermoluminescence dosimeter (TLD). The TLD must be calibrated during the initial testing process using the TLD Reader and this process will zero the dose which means the equivalent dose in it will be erased. This study is to read doses for TLD that have not been registered/calibrated in TLD Reader. The sample is 40 calibration cards of TLD Harshaw's shared in 5 sets testing with different dose, so every sets consists of 8 calibration cards. The calibration card was irradiated with 137 Cs source at a dose of 2 mSv, 3 mSv, 5 mSv, 7.5 mSv, and 10 mSv. The calibration curve was created by comparing the irradiation dose with the response calibration readings of the TLD Reader. The best calibration curve is the calibration curve on the polynomial/ quadratic model with R 2 = 0.9968 its mean pass the reference that good calibration curve have value of R 2 ≥. 0.990. The standard deviation of the dose measurement results at −3.87% to 21.98%, which means that the value is still in the range of −30% to 50% or not to exceed −30% to 50%. Equivalent dose in uncalibrated TLD can read using a polynomial calibration curve formula as evidenced by the value of R 2 ≥ 0.990 and a standard deviation that does not exceed −30% to 50%.

W. Yessi

B. Satoto

D. Darmini

Equivalent dose reading for unregistered TLD card with calibration curve

未注册TLD卡的等效剂量读数与校准曲线

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has embarked on a review and revision of the system of radiological protection (RP System) that will lead to new General Recommendations refining and superseding ICRP Publication 103. The first major milestone in ICRP's work was the publication of the paper titled ‘keeping the ICRP Recommendations Fit for Purpose’, in 2021, aimed at encouraging discussions within the RP community. On this matter, the Spanish Nuclear Safety Council (CSN) has contributed to preparing the Heads of the European Radiological Protection Competent Authorities (HERCA) document titled ‘Reflections on the Revision of the System of Radiological Protection’ that were presented during the ICRP symposium named ‘6th International Symposium on the System of Radiological Protection’. In the latter, HERCA emphasised the need for simplification and clarification of the RP System, as well as other topics for future work: (i) to improve the fundamental principles of justification and optimisation; (ii) to broaden the guidance on radiation protection against radon exposure in workplaces; and (iii) to improve communication of RP. CSN is supportive of the HERCA reflections, and wants to elaborate more on Communication, an issue that is intimately related to the simplification and clarification of the RP System. In this paper, we propose that the revision and review of the RP System be conceived, since its very inception, on the grounds of communicability. We recognise that it is a huge challenge because the scientific robustness of the RP System is unnegotiable. The involvement of communication professionals in the process of the RP System revision may help clarify matters such as the reason why dose limits are established on one hand but reference levels are proposed, on the other, as well as why different dose limits are applicable depending on the exposure situations. The RP System is based on robust scientific foundations but there is a tendency to focus on ‘uncertainties’ rather than the many ‘certainties’ that are already well known. Undoubtedly, there will always be ‘uncertainties’, but it is the purpose of research and development (R&amp;D) efforts and scientific discussions to turn them into certainties, which can be incorporated into regulations. However, the regulator’s actions shall be based on certainties and presented whenever the public claims for information before incidents and accidents, admitting that uncertainties exist, when it may be needed.

J.C. Lentijo

J. Zarzuela

Communication of radiation protection issues

辐射防护问题的沟通

This paper provides HERCA's reflections on the revision of the system of radiological protection. HERCA has identified four key areas of improvements of importance for HERCA members. These are simplification of the system of RP, justification and optimisation, use of reference levels, radon and communication. The paper elaborates the need for change identified in these four areas as well as in regard to a few other issues.

ISSN	0146-6453, 1872-969X
h-index	53

Publication Information	Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc.，Publishing cycle: ，Journal Type: journal，Open Access Journals: No
Basic data	Year of publication: 2012，Proportion of original research papers: 0.00%，Self Citation Rate:N.A.， Gold OA Rate: 0.00%

Annals of the ICRP

Journal Citation Format

A journal article with 1 author

A journal article with 2 authors

A journal article with 3 authors

A journal article with 5 or more authors

Books Citation Format

Thesis Citation Format

Web sites Citation Format

Patent Citation Format

Staying up late manually editing references? ivySCI automatically matches journals and helps you generate references with a single click.

Share Submission Experience

ICRU Report 95: new operational quantities for external radiation exposure

Optimisation of Radiological Protection in Digital Radiology Techniques for Medical Imaging

The 2019 Bo Lindell Laureate Lecture: On the use of interdisciplinary, stakeholder-driven, radiation protection research in support of medical uses of ionising radiation

Case study on occupational exposures to radiation with possible co-exposure to heavy metals

Protecting animals within a revised radiological protection framework

Case study on occupational exposures to radiation with possible co-exposure to heavy metals

Protecting animals within a revised radiological protection framework

Equivalent dose reading for unregistered TLD card with calibration curve

Communication of radiation protection issues

A European reflection on the revision of the System of Radiological Protection