The ICRP draft on "Occupational radiological protection in interventional radiology" is an interesting and very useful document. Some editorial comments are reported below, as well as some general and technical comments on single issues that require to be better specified.
Page # | Line # | Type* | Comment | Proposed change | |
|
| Ge |
| Insert figure and/or illustrations depicting the protection devices and methods and their applications. | |
9 | 225 | Ed | Typo (missing o) | occupational | |
10 | 274 | Ed | Parentheses after RELID is not needed | delete parentheses | |
14 | 459-ff | Ge/Te | The definition of effective dose given in the glossary (and also in Annex B, Paragraph B9) does not correspond to the effective dose as defined in ICRP Publication 103 (according to which the equivalent doses to organs are calculated separately for male and female and then averaged). | Insert correct definition of effective dose | |
19 | 614 | Ed | Missing space | insert space between "assurance" and "for" | |
21 | 689 | Ed | Missing space | insert space between "assurance" and "for" | |
21 | 692 | Ed | Useless comma | delete comma after "and" | |
24 | 832 | Ed | Missing space | Insert space between "PET" and "imaging" | |
24 | 833 | Ed | The last sentence of the paragraph ("Occupation exposures from interventional procedures") is only the short title of the document | Delete the sentence | |
25 | 856 | Te | A multicentric study in Germany evaluated radiation exposure of medical staff | ||
25-ff | 858-ff | Te/Ed | Different notations are used to indicate the position of the dosimeter on the apron: "over apron", "over-apron", "outside apron"… | Use a unique notation | |
25-26 | 886-887 | Ed | Sentence is ambiguous. Move "in a national survey" earlier in the sentence. | "Sanchez et al. (2017) found in a national survey monthly median…" | |
27 | 936 | Te | The symbol PKA for Kerma-area product has not yet been defined | Define PKA | |
27 | 944-947 | Ed | Sentence is hard to follow | Reformulate | |
27 | 950 | Ed |
| Introduce here the acronym ORAMED | |
28 | 970-978 | Te | Fig. 2.1 is not cited in the text. Additionally in the upper panel of the figure the value of average E is missing | Modify the figure accordingly and insert in the main text a reference to the figure. | |
29 | 987-ff | Te/Ed | Values are expressed sometimes in mGy and sometimes in µGy, and this may induce misunderstandings. | Use the same units throughout the paragraph | |
29 | 996 | Te/Ed | The acronyms for TAVI and TAVR have already been defined previously (line 915) | Just use the acronyms | |
29ff | 1030-ff | Ge/Te | The case of SIRT is a very special case. In my opinion only the scenario related to the trans-catheter delivery of the microspheres is of pertinence to this chapter, the other scenarios (preparation and calibration of the microspheres and exposures of nurses and care personnel) are common to every nuclear medicine procedure (specifically, radiotherapy applications) and should not be dealt with here. | Restrict the discussion to the trans-catheter delivery | |
30 | 1041 | Ed | missing space | insert space between "rates" and "if" | |
30 | 1059 | Ed | missing space | insert space between "purposes." and "Lower" | |
31 | 1098 | Ed | Typo | Delete "." after "2004" | |
32 | 1104 | Ed | Typo (missing s) | possible | |
32 | 1147-ff | Ge/Te | Section 2.5.2 deals actually with an incident related to a radioimmunotherapy treatment. Again, this has less to do with interventional procedures, rather with good practices in nuclear medicine therapy applications |
| |
33 | 1174 | Ed | Typo | Correct "infection" | |
33 |
1175-1177 | Ge/Te | Functioning commercial systems are available for eye-lens dosimetry, this should be acknowledged. |
| |
34 | 1244 | Ed | Typo | Check the sentence | |
37 | 1332-1334 | Ed | The text on "Lens of the eye" is differently structured as the corresponding text on "Whole Body" | Change the text accordingly: Lens of the eye: an equivalent dose to the lens of the eye of 20 mSv per year, averaged over defined periods of five years, provided that the equivalent dose to the lens of the eye does not exceed 50 mSv in any single year. | |
42 | 1552 | Te | It is not clear, from a practical point of view, ho to define in advance which is going to be the "finger nearest the patient". |
| |
46 | 1725-1728 | Ed | Font size: The sentence beginning with "This assessment" is formatted differently than the rest of the paragraph. |
| |
49 | 1880 | Ed | Typo | Change "gradiants" into "gradients" | |
50 | 1933 | Ed | Missing space | Add space between "Ho" and "where" | |
50 | 1935-1938 | Te/Ge | The sentence does not make much sense. It seems you have to check constantly your collar dosimeter and then use an eye dosimeter if you see that the dose exceeds 10 mSv. Additionally, this sentence is not consistent with paragraph (52), which states that there are no measurement techniques available for routine use for assessing eye lens doses. | Change "When the collar dosimeter reading exceeds…" into "When the collar dosimeter reading is expected to exceed" or, alternatively, "If experience has shown that the collar dosimeter reading…" | |
52 | 1994 | Ed | Missing text between "20 cm2-sized lead" and "ranging" | Check sentence | |
52 | 2029-2036 | Ge/Te | This sentence refers to therapy with beta emitters and has little to do with interventional procedure. | Remove or better specify the relevance for interventional procedures | |
54 | 2079 | Ed |
| Remove "be" between "can" and "benefit" | |
57 | 2181 | Ed | The formatting of the legend of Fig. 5.2 (text in parentheses) is different from the one in Fig. 5.1 | Use the same formatting | |
57 | 2189-2191 | Ge | The sentence "Occupational exposures.." is out of context here and has no link with the rest of the section (dealing with scattered radiation). | Remove | |
57-58 | 2197-2256 | Ge | The whole section 5.4.1 is practically dedicated to lead apron, subtitles may be removed (at least subtile 5.4.1) | Remove or rearrange subtitles | |
58 | 2208-ff | Te/Ed | Different notations are used to indicate light aprons: "lighter weight aprons", "lighter-weight aprons", "lightweight aprons"… | Use a unique notation | |
58 | 2238 | Ed | A reference "Johns et al." is indicated, however no year is associated to this reference and no related item is present in the list of references at the end of the document | Add details as appropriate (see also comment below) | |
58 | 2238-2243 | Te | The reference to the work of Wagner and Mulhem (1996) does not seem to be the proper reference for this text. More appropriate references are: A.K.Jones and L.K.Wagner, Med. Phys. 2013, 40:063902 A.S.Pasciak, A.K.Jones and L.K.Wagner, Med. Phys. 2015, 42:653-662 A.K.Jones, A.S.Pasciak and L.K.Wagner, Med. Phys. 2016, 43:4133 | Include the new references | |
58 | 2250-ff | Ge | The text in paragraph (157) is not pertinent with the title of the subsection 5.4.3. | Remove or rearrange subtitles (see also previous comment) | |
59 | 2261 | Ed | Typo (missing i) | Siiskonen et al. | |
59 | 2264 | Ed | "for males" repeated twice | Remove "for males" after "of age" | |
60 | 2322 | Ed | Missing space | Add space between "drapes" and "were" | |
61 | 2348 | Ed | Text is not consistent, either you say that simulations that provide higher values or that the DRFs derived from simulations assume higher values. | Remove "DRFs derived from" | |
61 | 2370 | Ed | Incomplete reference, the list of references reports three articles by Vano et al. issued in 2015. I assume that the authors wanted to quote the one labelled 2015c. | (2015c) | |
63 | 2470-ff | Ge/Te | Paragraph (184) seems to be a kind of summary of the previous paragraphs. However it quotes the paper of Sandblom et al. (2012) which never appears in the preceding text. |
| |
64 | 2508 | Ed | "would give a dose to 100 to 300 µGy" - Wrong preposition | "a dose from 100 to.." | |
66 | 2572 | Ed | The whole paragraph is dealing with hands, therefore the expression "On the other hand" might be confusing | Replace it with "Moreover" | |
67 | 2607-2609 | Ge/Te | The sentence "The types of.." contains general considerations and is out of context here. | Remove | |
68 | 2657-ff | Ge/Te | Paragraph (206) contains general considerations relevant for every therapy with beta emitters (or for every nuclear medicine procedure, actually) and has little to do with interventional procedure. | Remove or better specify the relevance for interventional procedures | |
69 | 2683 | Ed | Text is incomplete: "…x-ray spectra that used…" | Check the sentence | |
69 | 2700 | Ed | Typo, missing "t" | equipment | |
70 | 2702 | Ed | Typo, wrong spelling | strategies (delete a) | |
70 | 2704 | Ed | Typo, missing "s" | specialists | |
70 | 2722 | Ed | Typo, missing "s" | exposures | |
71 | 2747 | Te | The text refers to the information to be recorded, so I assume that the authors wanted to say that one has to record the actions that have been taken in response to an unusual event, and not the actions that should be taken (it doesn't seem very logical to record something that has not been done) | Remove "to be" between "measures" and "taken". | |
81 | 3199 | Ge | Missing reference details: only the document title is given, without any further bibliographic information (is it a printed document, an online resource,…?) | Add details as appropriate |
* Type: Ge = general, Ed = editorial, Te = technical