quality factor - correction to NCIT definition

[jmskip]

Currently imported from NCIT: "A factor assigned to a type of ionizing radiation in converting absorbed dose measured in grays to a biologically equivalent dose measured in sieverts. In formula form, (equivalent dose) = (quality factor) x (absorbed dose)"

Equivalent dose has specific meaning related to radiation weighting factor. Quality factor is specific to dose equivalent

Delete NCIT link.

NTR:

"A factor assigned to a type of ionizing radiation in converting absorbed dose measured in grays to dose equivalent, H, measured in sieverts. In formula form, (dose equivalent) = (quality factor) x (absorbed dose)"

[DanBerrios]

@jmskip Which NCIT concept did you want to unimport? I don't find one imported called "quality factor"

[jmskip]

Sylvain--Please vet

[jmskip]

You're right. I mistakenly thought it had been imported. So there are actually two issues:

1) NCIT needs correction because it says "equivalent dose" where it should say "dose equivalent".

2) NTR to add the corrected definition (above) to RBO.

Probably easier to just do 2), but NCIT def'n. is in fact wrong and we'd be doing the community a service to point that out.

[jmskip]

Dan--Raise issue on phone call this Monday.

[svcostes]

Agreed. I would try to put somewhere that dose equivalent stands for equivalent biological effect.

[jmskip]

Revised NTR per Sylvain's comment:

"A factor, Q, assigned to a type of ionizing radiation in converting absorbed dose, D, measured in gray to dose equivalent, H, measured in sieverts. In formula form, H=QxD, where dose equivalent is a measure of the biological effect of a given radiation type."

[DanBerrios]

Jack to resolve the 2 NCRP Definitions and the 3rd definition currently in RBO:

radiation quality: A general term referring to the relative biological effectiveness of the radiation of interest. For example, the absorbed dose from an exposure to neutron radiation may be quantitatively the same as that from an exposure to gamma rays in a volume of tissue on the order of 1 cm 3. However, at a higher resolution of a few micrometers the ionizing events will be more uniformly dispersed for the gamma-ray radiation than for the neutron radiation, thus producing quantitatively different biological effects (see relative biological effectiveness). [163]

radiation quality: A general term referring to the spatial distribution of absorbed dose. For example, an exposure to neutron radiation may be quantitatively the same as an exposure to gamma rays, in the sense that, for large volumes of tissue on the order of 1 cm3, the absorbed energy is the same, yet at resolutions of a few micrometers the ionizing events will be more uniformly dispersed for the gamma-ray radiation than for the neutron radiation, thus producing quantitatively different biological effects (see relative biological effectiveness).

[reality]

resetting to awaiting discusison because unclear what to do here. are we waiting on input from jack/kristen? it seems like we're waiting on a consolidated def for radiation quality.

[PaulNSchofield]

Lets not confuse radiation quality and quality factor. try" The radiation quality factor, also known as the QF or radiation weighting factor, is a term used in radiation protection to characterize the varying biological effectiveness of different types of ionizing radiation. It is a dimensionless quantity that represents the ability of a particular type of radiation to cause biological damage relative to a reference radiation, typically 250 kVp X-rays or gamma rays.

The quality factor takes into account the different levels of energy deposition and the varying biological response of tissues to different types of radiation. It is used to calculate the dose equivalent, which is a measure of the radiation dose adjusted for its potential biological effects on human tissues.

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has established recommended quality factors for different types of radiation. For example, X-rays and gamma rays have a quality factor of 1, indicating a relative biological effectiveness equal to that of the reference radiation. On the other hand, high linear energy transfer (LET) radiation, such as alpha particles, has a higher quality factor due to its increased potential for causing biological damage."

The two NCRP definitions above dont seem to be right. Citation: https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%2092 . This seems to be the most up to date ICRP doc. I think this is an ICE.