Skip Navigation


Radiation Protection Dosimetry Advance Access originally published online on July 9, 2007
Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2007 127(1-4):27-30; doi:10.1093/rpd/ncm339
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
127/1-4/27    most recent
ncm339v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Winkler-Heil, R.
Right arrow Articles by Birchall, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Winkler-Heil, R.
Right arrow Articles by Birchall, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Comparison of radon lung dosimetry models for the estimation of dose uncertainties

Renate Winkler-Heil1, Werner Hofmann1,*, James Marsh2 and Alan Birchall2

1 Division of Physics and Biophysics, Department of Materials Engineering and Physics, University of Salzburg, Hellbrunner Str. 34, 5020 Salzburg, Austria
2 Radiation Protection Division, Health Protection Agency, Chilton, Didcot, UK

* Corresponding author: werner.hofmann{at}sbg.ac.at

In order to investigate the degree of dose uncertainty produced by different models, three dosimetry models were compared with each other, representing different classes of models: (i) The RADEP/IMBA model based on the ICRP Human Respiratory Tract Model, a deterministic regional compartment model, (ii) the RADOS model, a deterministic airway generation model and (iii) the IDEAL dosimetry model, a stochastic airway generation model. The outputs of the three models for defined mining exposure conditions were compared at three different levels: deposition fractions for attached and unattached radon progeny; nuclear transformations, reflecting the combined effect of deposition and clearance; and resulting cellular doses. Resulting dose exposure conversion factors ranged from 7.8 (median) mSv/WLM (IDEAL) to 11.8 mSv/WLM (RADEP/IMBA), with 8.3 mSv/WLM (RADOS) as an intermediate value. Despite methodological and computational differences between the three models, resulting dose conversion factors do not appreciably differ from each other, although predictions by the two generation models are consistently smaller than that for the RADEP/IMBA model.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
P. F. Baias, W. Hofmann, R. Winkler-Heil, C. Cosma, and O. G. Duliu
LUNG DOSIMETRY FOR INHALED RADON PROGENY IN SMOKERS
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, September 18, 2009; (2009) ncp183v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
M. K. Schubauer-Berigan, R. D. Daniels, and L. E. Pinkerton
Radon Exposure and Mortality Among White and American Indian Uranium Miners: An Update of the Colorado Plateau Cohort
Am. J. Epidemiol., March 15, 2009; 169(6): 718 - 730.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
C. R. Muirhead
Exposure assessment: implications for epidemiological studies of ionizing radiation
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2008; 132(2): 134 - 138.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.