Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Cancer risk models for ionizing radiation.

D G Hoel1

  • 1National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.

Environmental Health Perspectives
|December 1, 1987
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

New models for evaluation of radiation-induced lifetime cancer risk and its uncertainty employed in the UNSCEAR 2006 report.

Radiation research·2008
Same author

Meta-analysis of standardized incidence and mortality rates of childhood leukaemia in proximity to nuclear facilities.

European journal of cancer care·2007
Same author

Residential mobility and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: an ecological study.

British journal of cancer·2007
Same author

Relative toxicity of chronic irradiation by 45Ca beta particles and 242Cm alpha particles with respect to the production of lung tumors in CBA/Ca mice.

Radiation research·2006
Same author

Residential radon exposure and lung cancer risk: commentary on Cohen's county-based study.

Health physics·2004
Same author

Stable chromosome aberrations and ionizing radiation in airline pilots.

Aviation, space, and environmental medicine·2003
Same journal

A New Start.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Time-Varying Exposure to Element Mixtures and Children's Cognition at 5 Years of Age: Findings from the New Hampshire Birth Cohort Study.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Effect of Household Air Pollution on the Gut Microbiome and Virome of Adult Women Living in Uganda.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Comparison of Temperature-Mortality Associations across the Middle East Using Different Exposure Estimation Approaches.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Workflow for Statistical Analysis of Environmental Mixtures.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
Same journal

Effects of Extreme Heat Exposure on Heatstroke and Liver Injury in Mice: The Role of PPARα.

Environmental health perspectives·2026
See all related articles

Estimating radiation carcinogenesis risk relies on epidemiological data and hazard models. The A-bomb survivor study illustrates the complexity of these radiation risk models.

Area of Science:

  • Radiation oncology
  • Epidemiology
  • Biostatistics

Background:

  • Radiation carcinogenesis risk assessment is crucial for public health and radiation protection.
  • Epidemiological data, particularly from long-term follow-up studies like the A-bomb survivors, are fundamental for understanding radiation effects.
  • Hazard rate models are essential tools for quantifying cancer risk following radiation exposure.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To discuss and illustrate various hazard rate models used in radiation carcinogenesis risk estimation.
  • To highlight the application of these models using data from the A-bomb survivors follow-up.
  • To underscore the complexity involved in radiation risk assessment.

Main Methods:

  • Review and discussion of established hazard rate models in radiation carcinogenesis.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Application and illustration of selected models using epidemiological data from the A-bomb survivors.
  • Comparative analysis of model performance in explaining observed cancer incidence.

    • Main Results:

    • The A-bomb survivor data provide a unique and complex dataset for evaluating radiation carcinogenesis models.
    • Different hazard rate models offer varying degrees of fit and insight into the dose-response relationship.
    • The study demonstrates the practical challenges and nuances in applying theoretical models to real-world epidemiological data.

    Conclusions:

    • Hazard rate models are indispensable for radiation carcinogenesis risk estimation, but their application requires careful consideration of data complexity.
    • The A-bomb survivor experience serves as a critical benchmark for refining and validating these models.
    • Continued research is needed to improve the accuracy and applicability of radiation risk models.