Moores B Michael
Integrated Radiological Services Ltd, Unit 188, Century Building, Brunswick Business Park, Liverpool, UK
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016 Jun;169(1-4):2-10. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncv506. Epub 2015 Dec 24.
In 1973, International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 22 recommended that the acceptability of radiation exposure levels for a given activity should be determined by a process of cost-benefit analysis. It was felt that this approach could be used to underpin both the principle of ALARA as well for justification purposes. The net benefit, B, of an operation involving irradiation was regarded as equal to the difference between its gross benefit, V, and the sum of three components; the basic production cost associated with the operation, P; the cost of achieving the selected level of protection, X; and the cost Y of the detriment involved in the operation: [Formula: see text] This article presents a theoretical cost-risk-benefit analysis that is applicable to the diagnostic accuracy (Levels 1 and 2) of the hierarchical efficacy model presented by National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements in 1992. This enables the costs of an examination to be related to the sensitivity and specificity of an X-ray examination within a defined clinical problem setting and introduces both false-positive/false-negative diagnostic outcomes into the patient radiation protection framework.
1973年，国际放射防护委员会第22号出版物建议，给定活动的辐射暴露水平的可接受性应由成本效益分析过程来确定。人们认为，这种方法可用于支持“尽可能低合理可行”原则以及用于正当性目的。涉及辐照的一项操作的净效益B被视为等于其总效益V与三个组成部分之和的差值；与该操作相关的基本生产成本P；实现选定防护水平的成本X；以及该操作所涉及的损害成本Y：[公式：见原文]本文提出了一种理论成本-风险-效益分析方法，该方法适用于美国国家辐射防护与测量委员会1992年提出的分级效能模型的诊断准确性（1级和2级）。这使得在特定临床问题背景下，一项检查的成本能够与X射线检查的敏感性和特异性相关联，并将假阳性/假阴性诊断结果引入患者辐射防护框架。
