Skip to main content
Log in

Response to “On the choice of methodology for evaluating dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks” by Walsh et al.

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
Radiation and Environmental Biophysics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Letter to the Editor to this article was published on 30 September 2021

The Original Article was published on 25 June 2021

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Cook RD, Weisberg S (1990) Confidence curves in nonlinear regression. J Am Stat Assoc 85(410):544–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deming WE (1943) Statistical adjustment of data. Wiley, New York, p 1–261

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dufour J-M (1997) Some impossibility theorems in econometrics with applications to structural and dynamic models. Econometrica 65(6):1365–1387

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fieller EC (1940) The biological standardization of insulin. Suppl J Roy Statist Soc 7(1):1–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fieller EC (1954) Some problems in interval estimation. J Royal Statist Soc Series B 16(2):175–185

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Little MP, Pawel DJ, Abalo K, Hauptmann M (2021) Methodological improvements to meta-analysis of low dose rate studies and derivation of dose and dose-rate effectiveness factors. Radiat Environ Biophys 60(3):485–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh L, Shore R, Azizova TV, Rühm W (2021) On the choice of methodology for evaluating dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks. Radiat Environ Biophys 60(3):493–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • York D, Evensen NM, López Martínez M, De Basabe Delgado J (2004) Unified equations for the slope, intercept, and standard errors of the best straight line. Am J Phys 72(3):367–375

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark P. Little.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Little, M.P., Pawel, D.J., Abalo, K. et al. Response to “On the choice of methodology for evaluating dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks” by Walsh et al.. Radiat Environ Biophys 60, 515–516 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-021-00935-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-021-00935-5

Navigation