Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 41, Issue 5, pp 562–565 | Cite as

Image Gently pediatric digital radiography summit: executive summary

  • Steven DonEmail author
  • Marilyn J. Goske
  • Susan John
  • Bruce Whiting
  • Charles E. Willis

The goal of the Alliance for Radiation Safety in Pediatric Radiology’s Image Gently campaign is to promote radiation protection for children undergoing imaging examinations that use ionizing radiation. The campaign creates awareness, develops educational content toward this goal, and more recently has advocated for change in equipment design to better meet the needs of pediatric patients. A previous meeting sponsored by the Alliance, the Image Gently CT Vendor Summit in 2008, urged manufacturers to standardize the CT dose display and nomenclature across vendors and promoted the adoption of a more accurate dose display or patient dose index to account for the wide range of size variability among pediatric patients. The campaign held a second meeting, the Image Gently Pediatric Digital Radiography Summit, building on the work of Drs. Charles E. Willis and Thomas L. Slovis, co-chairs of the 2004 conference, the ALARA Concept in Pediatric CR and DR: Dose Reduction in Pediatric Exams [1].



Digital radiography Pediatric Quality assurance Education 


  1. 1.
    Willis CE, Slovis TL (2004) The ALARA concept in pediatric CR and DR: dose reduction in pediatric radiographic exams— a white paper conference executive summary. Pediatr Radiol 34:S162–S164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, NCRP Report 160 (2009) Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States. NCRP Publications, Bethesda, MDGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shepard SJ, Wang J, Flynn M et al (2009) An exposure indicator for digital radiography: AAPM Task Group 116 (executive summary). Med Phys 36:2898–2914PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Medical electrical equipment - Exposure index of digital X-ray imaging systems - Part 1: Definitions and requirements for general radiography, International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), international standard IEC 62494-1:2008-08 Geneva, Switzerland, 2008.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Langlotz CP (2006) RadLex: a New method for indexing online educational materials. Radiographics 26:1595–1597PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Siddiqui KM, Siegel EL, Reiner BI et al (2005) Correlation of radiologists’ image quality perception with quantitative assessment parameters: just-noticeable difference vs. peak signal-to-noise ratios. Medical Imaging 2005: PACS and Imaging Informatics. SPIE, San Diego, pp 58–64Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reid J (2007) Online Digital Imaging Academy. Radiol Technol 79:81–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health (2010) Development of training materials promoting safe use of computed and digital radiography equipment with children. Solicitation number REQ1076172Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Don
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Marilyn J. Goske
    • 3
  • Susan John
    • 4
  • Bruce Whiting
    • 5
  • Charles E. Willis
    • 6
  1. 1.Electronic Radiology LaboratoryMallinckrodt Institute of RadiologySt. LouisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Radiology, St. Louis Children’s HospitalWashington University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyCincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical CenterCincinnatiUSA
  4. 4.Diagnostic and Interventional RadiographyUniversity of Texas Houston Medical SchoolHoustonUSA
  5. 5.Electronic Radiology Laboratory, Mallinckrodt Institute of RadiologyWashington University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA
  6. 6.Department of Imaging PhysicsUniversity of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations