Hello, I've been trying to learn everything I can about x rays before I start radiography school and I was wondering if I could ask you a question about something unrelated to this video? I don't know who else to ask. I came across a confusing quiz question on the website Radreview. The question says: "which of the following statements are true regarding compton scatter" and then it goes on to list a bunch of statements. One of the possible answers says "Responsible for patient absorbed dose". I thought that was correct, but when I selected that answer, it said it was wrong. So the website Radreview essentially teaches that compton scatter does not contribute to patient absorbed dose. That completely contradicts what I've learned about compton scatter. I was under the impression that when a compton event occurs, an x ray strikes an outer shell electron, ejecting it from its orbit, and that recoil electron can then go on to impart dose to the patient by ionizing the atoms in surrounding tissue. Is that not the case? Is it true that comton scatter doesn't contribute to patient dose?
Chad I agree that it sounds like the question is misleading. Impressive studying to learn about this ahead of school. You’re right Compton events deposit a fraction of the dose locally and the rest travels away with the scattered photon. If they have a contact form you could write them a comment.
I presented papers at Australian national conferences in 1988 and 2016 about the errors in text books and ingrained in the practices of radiographers for a century. So what happens to the projection if tube angulation is changed by pushing the tube angulation button? Only collimation is changed and the centring point. The projection can't be changed unless the position of the tube focus changes in relation to the patient. This error in thinking caused the Townes projection to give 30 million people a needless dose of primary beam radiation to the face and neck. Collimation should have been to the brow line and the tube angle changed to 26 degrees. A billion men probably had their gonads in the primary beam on abdomens and lumbar spines due to bad collimation caused by the centring point method. My survey at the 2016 conference only involved qualifieds and 75% didn't understand the geometry of a projection or knew how to use a focused xray grid. If I tested students, 95% didn't get the right answer. If I tested radiologists, only 1 in 20 were wrong. Here is my video. czcams.com/video/mZPD_gLs5Dw/video.htmlsi=nKwDYNEQXFK0lLxQ
Hello, I've been trying to learn everything I can about x rays before I start radiography school and I was wondering if I could ask you a question about something unrelated to this video? I don't know who else to ask. I came across a confusing quiz question on the website Radreview. The question says: "which of the following statements are true regarding compton scatter" and then it goes on to list a bunch of statements. One of the possible answers says "Responsible for patient absorbed dose". I thought that was correct, but when I selected that answer, it said it was wrong. So the website Radreview essentially teaches that compton scatter does not contribute to patient absorbed dose. That completely contradicts what I've learned about compton scatter. I was under the impression that when a compton event occurs, an x ray strikes an outer shell electron, ejecting it from its orbit, and that recoil electron can then go on to impart dose to the patient by ionizing the atoms in surrounding tissue. Is that not the case? Is it true that comton scatter doesn't contribute to patient dose?
Chad I agree that it sounds like the question is misleading. Impressive studying to learn about this ahead of school. You’re right Compton events deposit a fraction of the dose locally and the rest travels away with the scattered photon. If they have a contact form you could write them a comment.
@@HowRadiologyWorks Thanks for the reply. I’m glad to know the problem is with rad review rather than my comprehension of Compton scatter. Subscribed
YO RAD NATION, I don't know why CZcams suggested this to me, but hey, I'm not complaining
Thanks 🙏. Does CZcams know you are interested in x-ray and CT? Hopefully you can find something useful 🌝
I presented papers at Australian national conferences in 1988 and 2016 about the errors in text books and ingrained in the practices of radiographers for a century. So what happens to the projection if tube angulation is changed by pushing the tube angulation button? Only collimation is changed and the centring point. The projection can't be changed unless the position of the tube focus changes in relation to the patient. This error in thinking caused the Townes projection to give 30 million people a needless dose of primary beam radiation to the face and neck. Collimation should have been to the brow line and the tube angle changed to 26 degrees. A billion men probably had their gonads in the primary beam on abdomens and lumbar spines due to bad collimation caused by the centring point method. My survey at the 2016 conference only involved qualifieds and 75% didn't understand the geometry of a projection or knew how to use a focused xray grid. If I tested students, 95% didn't get the right answer. If I tested radiologists, only 1 in 20 were wrong. Here is my video. czcams.com/video/mZPD_gLs5Dw/video.htmlsi=nKwDYNEQXFK0lLxQ
Thanks for sharing