Effects of Adaptive Section Collimation on Patient Radiation Dose in Multisection Spiral CT - Essay Example

"Effects of Adaptive Section Collimation on Patient Radiation Dose in Multisection Spiral CT" is an engrossing example of a paper on radiology. To provide a sufficient book report and even book review on Deak and Langner's book “Effects of Adaptive Section Collimation on Patient Radiation Dose in Multisection Spiral CT,” we need to produce some overall suggestions concerning the aforesaid text, is based strictly on the authors' conclusions as they were explicated. Accordingly, there are three main agents “of influence” within a book: “thermoluminescent dosimeters,” “ionization chambers,” and “CT dose index phantom” (Deak & Langner, 2008). In the current paper, we will be able not only to represent but also to critically review the authors' main positions.

            Additionally, we need to state that the book is overloaded with a big quantity of diagrams concerning an “engineering” nature of the text. From the very beginning, we have been informed that only three crucial agents in the network are viable, predominantly: “thermoluminescent dosimeters” used for measurement of dose profiles; “CT dose index phantom,” in which center TLD dose profile measurements were performed separately; and, a “28-mL active-volume ionization chamber” used for calibration of TLDs (Deak & Langner, 2008). Then, there appeared one's more - “central plane of the x-ray cone beam using the laser light-positioning system.” (Deak & Langner, 2008) Furthermore, two “spiral scanning protocols” were introduced by the researchers corresponding to a “cardiac and chest examination.” Also, from the root text, it is clear that measurements in an Alderson-Rando phantom have approximately the same characteristics as our CT dose index. Moreover, this hard technical parade was enlarged by a presentation of “electrometer” for “scan ranges” and “pitch values.” (Deak & Langner, 2008)

            Therefore, after these tools' introduction, we may pay attention to the MC calculations. It should be added that, except a vivid cohesion between researchers' laboratory work and digital tools that they have, one more bright and undeniable characteristic must be performed concerning this text: fantastically big amount of citations, figures, and interrelations between health, medical, science, engineering, digital, and even popular discourses. In fact, the calculation stage is connected closely with “the implementation and validation of the tool,” which meaningful passage on the “three-dimensional dose distributions” supported our previously stated assumption. (Deak & Langner, 2008) Again, “photons,” “voxels,” “Polymethyl Methacrylate,” and “fluoroscopic mode” are heroes from the next chapter of the commented book. Also, it becomes evident that the “z-axis” rate is somehow determined by “dynamic collimation.” (Deak & Langner, 2008) On the other hand, this gives us nothing except a meaningless extension of facts about laboratory experiments of the researchers on CT dose index phantoms in a situation of dynamic collimation.

            To conclude with, the current book forces us to make such assumptions about the very nature of it, especially cognitive system and methodological design of Deak & Co: it is itinerary-like, being based on the results from a procession of radiological experiments; then, some agents play a very important role in the narration, because, according to French philosopher of science, Bruno Latour, only these tools, their description, and functions, are meaningful in the scientific experiments, due to a fact that they are like mediators of direct and indirect influences between people as subjects and dependable objects in the laboratory: not results, but tools of influence are meaningful for the scientific work ¨C and this overall statement was proved by our authors because we can see this determination in the given book. Additionally, written in a hyper-professional manner, it may be presented as a whole meta-narrative or hyper-text or even intertext, due to a field of different interrelations/citations between various agents, tools, subjects, objects, and environments that are included intentionally or unintentionally within the abovesaid network of effects and matrix of scientific persuasion.