Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34501660›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Bringing Light into Darkness-Comparison of Different Personal Dosimeters for Assessment of Solar Ultraviolet Exposure.

Claudine Strehl, Timo Heepenstrick, Peter Knuschke, Marc Wittlich

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. UVR Exposure and Prevention of Street Construction Workers in Colombia and Germany.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Claudine StrehlDepartment Ergonomics: Physical Environmental Factors, Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German Social Accident Insurance, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany.
Timo HeepenstrickDepartment Ergonomics: Physical Environmental Factors, Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German Social Accident Insurance, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany.
Peter KnuschkeDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universitaet Dresden, D-01307 Dresden, Germany.
Marc WittlichDepartment Accident Prevention: Digitalisation-Technologies, Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German Social Accident Insurance, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9765-1082
Institut für Arbeitsschutz der Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung · DETechnische Universität Dresden · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Measuring personal exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) poses a major challenges for researchers. Often, the study design determines the measuring devices that can be used, be it the duration of measurements or size restrictions on different body parts. It is therefore of great importance that measuring devices produce comparable results despite technical differences and modes of operation. Particularly when measurement results from different studies dealing with personal UV exposure are to be compared with each other, the need for intercomparability and intercalibration factors between different measurement systems becomes significant. (2) Three commonly used dosimeter types-(polysulphone film (PSF), biological, and electronic dosimeters)-were selected to perform intercalibration measurements. They differ in measurement principle and sensitivity, measurement accuracy, and susceptibility to inaccuracies. The aim was to derive intercalibration factors for these dosimeter types. (3) While a calibration factor between PSF and electronic dosimeters of about 1.3 could be derived for direct irradiation of the dosimeters, this was not the case for larger angles of incidence of solar radiation with increasing fractions of diffuse irradiation. Electronic dosimeters show small standard deviation across all measurements. For biological dosimeters, no intercalibration factor could be found with respect to PSF and electronic dosimeters. In a use case, the relation between steady-state measurements and personal measurements was studied. On average, persons acquired only a small fraction of the ambient radiation.

Indexed as

Radiation DosimetersUltraviolet RaysDarknessElectronicsRadiation Dosageintercalibrationpersonal dosimetryUV radiation

Identifiers

PMID34501660
PMCPMC8431201
OpenAlexW3197569525

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.