Development of a mobile application for assessing radiation risk associated with medical X-ray radiological examinations

The use of ionizing radiation is one of the most rapidly developing areas in medical diagnostics; it has led to a steady increase in both the number of examinations and the collective dose of medical exposure in recent years. In this regard, improving access to reliable scientific information on radiation risks associated with medical exposure is a relevant and timely objective. The aim of this study is to describe a mobile application developed for assessing radiation risk associated with medical X-ray radiological examinations for patients of different sexes and ages from the Russian population. Materials and Methods: To provide a comprehensive representation of radiation risks from diagnostic medical exposure, the mobile application incorporates results based on four different risk indicators: average individual effective dose; average number of disability-adjusted life years lost; average risk of developing malignant neoplasms adjusted for disease severity; and a qualitative risk scale supplemented with color-coded visual representation of risk magnitude. To build the database of radiation risk indicators, a total of 17,719 organ dose estimates were used. These were obtained for patients of various ages undergoing diagnostic medical examinations. Results and Discussion: The developed mobile application features a bilingual interface with the option to add additional language modules. Its minimalist design allows switching between three main screens: “Single Study”, “Study Series”, and “Saved Series”. Conclusion: The development of this mobile application for radiation risk assessment represents the first practical implementation of the risk assessment methodologies developed by the authors, with the goal of creating a simple tool to support information accessibility for patients, their legal representatives, healthcare professionals, and a wide range of interested users.

1. Sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation. UNSCEAR 2020/2021 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes. Volume I. Annex A. Evaluation of medical exposure to ionizing radiation. New York: United Nations; 2021. 344 p.

2. Mahesh M, Ansari A, Mettler F. Patient Eexposure from radiologic and nuclear medicine. Procedures in the United States and worldwide: 2009–2018. Radiology. 2023;307(1): e221263. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.221263Mahesh.

3. Vodovatov AV, Romanovich IK, Alekhnovich AV, Biblin AM, Akhmatdinov RR, Druzhinina PS, et al. Radiation Safety of Patients in Diagnostic Radiology in the Russian Federation: Current Status, Problems and Solutions. Meditsinskaya Fizika = Medical Physics. 2024(4): 33-49. (In Russian). DOI:10.52775/1810-200x-2024-104-4-33-49

4. Yudin AL, Nikitin AE, Yumatova EA. The role of informed consent in CT scan. Luchevaya Diagnostika i Terapiya = Diagnostic Radiology and Radiotherapy. 2017;4(8): 77-86. (In Russian).

5. Schieber C, Pölzl-Viol C, Cantone M, Železnik N, Economides S, Gschwind R, et al. Engaging health professionals and patients in the medical field: role of radiological protection culture and informed consent practices. Radioprotection. 2020;55: 235-242. DOI:10.1051/radiopro/2020039.

6. Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Azman Firdaus H, Stewart C, Malekhedayat M, Alber S, et al. Projected lifetime cancer risks from current computed tomography imaging. JAMA Internal Medicine. 2025;185(6): 710. DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.0505

7. Global burden of disease 2004 update: disability weights for diseases and conditions. Geneva: WHO; 2004.

8. Gao T, Wang X, Chen R, Ngo H, Guo W. Disability adjusted life year (DALY): A useful tool for quantitative assessment of environmental pollution. Science of The Total Environment. 2015;511: 268-287. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.11.048

9. Kochetkov DV, Sterlikov SA, Liutsko VV. Assessment of the burden of tuberculosis in the Yamal-Nenets autonomous okrug and factors influencing the value of DALY, YLL, YLD. Sovremennye Problemy Zdravookhraneniya i Meditsinskoy Statistiki = Current Problems of Health Care and Medical Statistics. 2025;(1): 415-436. (In Russian) DOI: 10.24412/2312-2935-2025-1-415-436

10. Thomsen ST, Jakobsen LS, Redondo HG, Outzen M, Fagt S, Devleesschauwer B, et al. Burden of disease of dietary exposure to four chemical contaminants in Denmark, 2019. Exposure and Health. 2022;14(4): 871-883. DOI: 10.1007/s12403-022-00461-9

11. Radiation detriment calculation methodology. ICRP. ICRP Publication 152. 2022. Annals of the ICRP. 2022;51(3): 103.

12. Tapiovaara M, Siiskonen T. PCXMC: A Monte Carlo program for calculating patient doses in medical X-ray examinations. 2nd Ed. STUK, Finalnd; 2008.

13. Vodovatov AV, Golikov VYu, Kamyshanskaya IG, Zinkevich KV, Bernhardsson Ch. Estimation of the conversion coefficients from dose-area product to effective dose for barium meal examinations for adult patients. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2018;11(1): 93-100. (In Russian). DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2018-11-1-93-100

14. Vodovatov A, Golikov V, Kamyshanskaya I, Cheremysin V, Zinkevich K, Bernhardsson K. Estimation of the effective doses from typical fluoroscopic examinations with barium contrast. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2021;195(3-4): 264-272. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncab059

15. Repin LV, Akhmatdinov RR, Biblin AM, Repin VS. Development of the Automated System for Radiation Risk Analysis: goals, tasks and the vision for progress. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2023;16(4): 22-31. (In Russian). DOI: 10.21514/1998-426X-2023-16-4-22-31