Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
In computed tomography (CT) examinations, the usefulness of protective glasses for reducing lens exposure to assistants has been reported. The present study aimed to compare the dose reduction effect for assistants with lead-acrylic shields and protective glasses (0.07 mm Pb, 0.5 mm Pb) during CT examination. The air dose distribution in a CT examination room with and without a lead-acrylic shield was compared. It was found that the amount of scattered radiation was significantly reduced by installing a lead-acrylic shield at the CT gantry aperture. Moreover, the reduction rate of air kerma at the assistant's lens was higher using the lead acrylic shield than with the protective glasses-95.7% during head holding and 76.1% during assisted ventilation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ac7919 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!