Examination of Radiation Dosimetry Methods: A Comparative Perspective
ATTENTION:
BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPICS BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COST N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR
YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08137701720,
WHATSAPP/TELEGRAM US ON: 08137701720
Examination of Radiation Dosimetry Methods: A Comparative Perspective
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Radiation dosimetry is the science of measuring, calculating, and assessing the absorbed dose of ionizing radiation in matter, especially in human tissue. It plays a central role in medical imaging, radiotherapy, nuclear medicine, industrial radiography, and radiation protection (Attix, 2008; Podgoršak, 2016). Accurate dosimetry ensures that radiation is used effectively for diagnosis and treatment while minimizing harmful biological effects to patients, workers, and the general public (IAEA, 2014).
Over the years, a variety of radiation dosimetry techniques have been developed to meet different operational needs. These include ionization chambers, thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeters, film dosimeters, and electronic personal dosimeters (EPDs) (Turner, 2007; IAEA, 2017). Each technique differs in terms of sensitivity, accuracy, energy dependence, dose range, and ease of use.
In clinical practice, ionization chambers are considered the reference standard for dose calibration in radiotherapy and diagnostic radiology due to their high accuracy and stability (Podgoršak, 2016). TLDs and OSL dosimeters are widely used for personnel monitoring because they can integrate dose over time and are small and tissue-equivalent (IAEA, 2014). However, environmental factors, calibration methods, and handling procedures can significantly affect measurement reliability (Attix, 2008).
In many developing countries, including Nigeria, the selection and use of dosimetry techniques are often influenced by cost, availability, and technical expertise rather than strict performance criteria (Oladipo et al., 2020). This creates variability in dose measurement practices across facilities. An evaluative study of radiation dosimetry techniques is therefore essential to determine their effectiveness, limitations, and suitability under practical working conditions.
________________________________________
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Despite the availability of various radiation dosimetry techniques, inconsistencies in dose measurement remain a major challenge in clinical and industrial radiation use (IAEA, 2017). Differences in detector response, calibration standards, and environmental sensitivity can lead to systematic and random errors in dose assessment (Turner, 2007).
In many Nigerian facilities, dosimetry equipment is either outdated, poorly calibrated, or used without adequate quality assurance protocols (Oladipo et al., 2020). As a result, radiation workers and patients may be exposed to doses that are either underestimated or overestimated, compromising safety and regulatory compliance.
Furthermore, there is limited empirical evidence comparing the performance of commonly used dosimetry techniques under local operational conditions. This lack of evaluative data makes it difficult for practitioners and policymakers to choose the most appropriate and reliable techniques for routine monitoring and clinical applications. Hence, the problem is the absence of systematic evaluation of radiation dosimetry techniques in practical settings.
________________________________________
**1.3 Aim and Objectives of the Study
Aim:
The main aim of this study is to evaluate radiation dosimetry techniques in terms of accuracy, reliability, and suitability for different radiation applications.
Objectives:
The specific objectives are to:
1. Identify the major radiation dosimetry techniques used in practice.
2. Evaluate the accuracy and precision of selected dosimetry methods.
3. Examine the advantages and limitations of each technique.
4. Assess their suitability for personnel monitoring and clinical dose measurement.
5. Recommend the most effective dosimetry techniques for routine use.
________________________________________
1.4 Research Questions
1. What radiation dosimetry techniques are commonly used in practice?
2. How accurate and reliable are these techniques?
3. What are the strengths and weaknesses of each dosimetry method?
4. Which techniques are most suitable for personnel and patient dose monitoring?
5. How can radiation dose measurement practices be improved?
________________________________________
1.5 Significance of the Study
This study will benefit medical physicists, radiographers, radiation protection officers, and regulatory agencies by providing data-driven guidance on selecting and using appropriate dosimetry techniques. It will also enhance radiation safety by improving dose accuracy and monitoring standards. Academically, the study will contribute to the growing body of knowledge on radiation measurement and dosimetry practices, especially in developing countries.
________________________________________
1.6 Scope of the Study
The study focuses on the evaluation of selected radiation dosimetry techniques such as ionization chambers, TLDs, OSL dosimeters, film badges, and electronic personal dosimeters. The evaluation is limited to their performance in measuring ionizing radiation doses in clinical and occupational environments.
1.7 Operational Definitions of Terms
• Radiation Dosimetry: The measurement and calculation of absorbed dose from ionizing radiation (Attix, 2008).
• Ionization Chamber: A detector that measures radiation by collecting charge from ionized gas (Podgoršak, 2016).
• Thermoluminescent Dosimeter (TLD): A device that stores radiation energy and releases it as light when heated (IAEA, 2014).
• Optically Stimulated Luminescence (OSL): A dosimetry technique where light stimulation releases stored radiation energy (IAEA, 2017).
• Accuracy: The closeness of a measured dose to the true value.
• Precision: The repeatability of dose measurements under identical condition
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL (S)
After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to any of the numbers below
08068231953, 08137701720,
(1) Your project topics
(2) Email Address
(3) Payment Name
OR you drop them on our WhatsApp/Telegram, 08137701720
We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 0046579864
Bank: GTBank.
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 3139283609
Bank: FIRST BANK
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 2023350498
Bank: UBA.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953, 08137701720, 08154275408
http://graduateprojects.com.ng