4.3 Article

Mathematical models of the embryo and fetus for use in radiological protection

Journal

HEALTH PHYSICS
Volume 86, Issue 3, Pages 285-295

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00004032-200403000-00005

Keywords

modeling, biological factors; phantom; pregnancy; dosimetry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This development of new mathematical models arose from our current work in external neutron dosimetry for the embryo and fetus when pregnant women travel at commercial aircraft altitudes. A problem of concern in radiation protection is exposure of pregnant women to ionizing radiation because of the high radiosensitivity of the embryo and fetus. Special regulations and dosimetric considerations are necessary for pregnant women at the work place and in the public. To perform dosimetry, mathematical models for the embryo and the fetus, together with the modified adult female model for pregnant woman, are required. There are no models available for embryo. Models developed for the fetus need to be updated with the new reference values such as those in ICRP Publication 89. This article presents mathematical models for the embryo and fetus at different stages: the embryo at 8 wk and the fetus at the end of each trimester. In addition to fetal skeleton, the fetal brain is explicitly modeled because of its high radiosensitivity. All model parameters are determined from the most recent reference values available. The models are designed so that an interpolation can be easily performed to generate a model of embryo/fetus at any given stage of development. This feature also allows convenient adaptation of the models to different reference values representing various ethnic populations. The new mathematical models presented here were developed for external dosimetry. They can also be used for internal dosimetry purposes, if other organs inside the female phantom are adjusted accordingly.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available