Lessons of the 3rd international intercomparison on EPR dosimetry with teeth: similarities and differences of two successful techniques.
Despite the considerable improvement in accuracy in comparison with previous intercomparison programmes, the outcome of the recent 3rd International Intercomparison on EPR Tooth Dosimetry has demonstrated that performance of various protocols practised in different laboratories significantly varies. SCRM and MUG took part in this intercomparison with their own versions of EPR dosimetry protocols, demonstrating the good correlation between reconstructed and nominal doses (best result for SCRM and fourth best for MUG) and the lowest both absolute and relative mean deviations from the nominal doses. Although the general results of the 3rd Intercomparison are being discussed elsewhere in this issue by Wieser et al., this presentation is focused on the discussion of the common features of the two techniques, which may have an effect on good performance in dose reconstruction. In addition to the mthods of analysis of the intercomparison results, as used in Wieser et al., SCRM and MUG studied the influence of an additional factor--the selection of the standard of the native signal--on the quality of the dose reconstruction.
Chumak
V
V
Scientific Center of Radiation Medicine, 04050, Melnikova Street 53, Kiev, Ukraine. chumak@leed1.kiev.ua
Ciesielski
B
B
Sholom
S
S
Schultka
K
K
D004307:Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; D004578:Electron Spin Resonance Spectroscopy / Q000379:methods*; D004867:Equipment Design; D019544:Equipment Failure Analysis; D006801:Humans; D008422:Materials Testing; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D011868:Radioisotopes / Q000032:analysis*; D011874:Radiometry / Q000379:methods*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014070:Tooth / Q000737:chemistry*
D011868:Radioisotopes