ReviewAfrican health sciences2025
Diagnostic reference levels in Africa: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in African health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Establishment of Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for Adult CT Brain in Johannesburg, South Africa: A Retrospective Protocol Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite its wide acceptance and recommendation as an essential tool for radiation exposure optimization and the increasing influx of high-technology imaging facilities, there is still a paucity of available data on the Diagnostic reference level (DRL) of ionizing radiation radiological examinations and its use in many African countries. Objectives: This review aims to evaluate published work on DRLs in Africa and to establish the status of DRL in common radiological examinations in Africa. Methods: The electronic databases, namely; Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, CINAHL, AJOL, and Web of Science, will be searched using a developed search strategy to include only published articles and survey studies retrieved in English from 1996 to December 2022. Information to be extracted will include the World Bank income level, World Bank geographical region, country of origin, research sponsorship, year of publication, age group of the patients, imaging modality, local/regional/national DRL, type of examination, study design, type of DRL quantity, and whether DRLs were established as the 75th percentile or mean of the median or mean of DRL quantity measured. Descriptive statistics will be formulated and a narrative synthesis of the information from selected studies measured. If required, we will include a subgroup analysis based on the income level of the countries, geographical regions, and year of publication. Results: This study will provide information on the status of diagnostic reference levels of common radiological examinations in Africa. Conclusion: The result of this study will be useful in healthcare policymaking and by the end-users of medical radiation facilities, thereby ensuring the optimization of radiation exposure in patients undergoing medical ionizing-radiation imaging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.