Annual report on the activities of Health Physics in JAERI in 2004; April 1, 2004March 31, 2005

Department of Health Physics; Safety Division, Naka; Safety Division, Takasaki; Radiation Control Division, Oarai; Safety Division, Kansai; Operation Safety Administration Division, Mutsu

JAERI-Review 2005-028, 232 Pages, 2005/08

JAERI-Review-2005-028.pdf:13.23MB

no abstracts in English

Annual report of the activities of Health Physics in JAERI in 2002; April 1, 2002March 31, 2003

Department of Health Physics; Safety Division, Naka; Safety Division, Takasaki; Radiation Control Division, Oarai; Safety Division, Kansai; Operation Safety Administration Division, Mutsu

JAERI-Review 2003-034, 208 Pages, 2003/11

JAERI-Review-2003-034.pdf:13.41MB

no abstracts in English

Annual report of the activities of Health Physics in JAERI in 2000; April 1, 2000 - March 31, 2001

Department of Health Physics; Safety Division, Naka; Safety Division, Takasaki; Radiation Control Division, Oarai; Safety Division, Kansai; Operation Safety Administration Division, Mutsu

JAERI-Review 2001-041, 221 Pages, 2001/12

JAERI-Review-2001-041.pdf:14.1MB

no abstracts in English

Health Physics in JAERI, No.41; April 1, 1998 - March 31, 1999

Department of Health Physics; Safety Division, Naka; Safety Division, Takasaki; Radiation Control Division, Oarai; Utilities and Safety Division, Kansai; Operation Safety Administration Division, Mutsu

JAERI-Review 2000-001, p.225 - 0, 2000/03

JAERI-Review-2000-001.pdf:9.42MB

no abstracts in English

Health physics in JAERI, No.39; April 1, 1996 - March 31, 1997

Department of Health Physics; Safety Division, Naka; Safety Division, Takasaki; ; ; Operation Safety Administration Division, Mutsu

JAERI-Review 97-016, 248 Pages, 1997/12

JAERI-Review-97-016.pdf:7.82MB

no abstracts in English

Health physics in JAERI, No.37; April 1, 1994 - March 31, 1995

Department of Health Physics; Safety Division, Naka; Safety Division, Takasaki; ; Operation Safety Administration Division, Mutsu;

JAERI-Review 95-020, 264 Pages, 1995/11

JAERI-Review-95-020.pdf:8.68MB

no abstracts in English

Protection and dosimetry of non-ionizing radiation (alternating electromagnetic fields)

*; Asano, Yoshihiro; *; Sudo, Norimichi*

SSR-93-002, 0, 67 Pages, 1993/12

no abstracts in English

Results and lessons from the accident study and recovery actions for TMI-2; Introduction to TMI special volume of the Nuclear Technology

JAERI-M 93-111, 464 Pages, 1993/06

JAERI-M-93-111.pdf:20.79MB

no abstracts in English

Health Physics in JAERI, No.33

Department of Health Physics; ; ; ; ; ;

JAERI-M 91-171, 294 Pages, 1991/11

JAERI-M-91-171.pdf:8.57MB

no abstracts in English

Health physics in JAERI, No.31

Department of Health Physics; ; ; ; ; ;

JAERI-M 89-212, 334 Pages, 1989/12

JAERI-M-89-212.pdf:9.28MB

no abstracts in English

Development of cancer risk estimation code due to radiation exposure, 3; Verification and perspective

Kai, Michiaki*; Shimada, Kazumasa; Kudo, Shinichi*; Furukawa, Kyoji*; Satoh, Daiki; Takahara, Shogo; Takagi, Shunji*; Sasaki, Michiya*

no journal, , 

This presentation is the third in a series of three presentations on the results of the "Expert Group on the Development of Cancer Risk Estimation Codes Associated with Radiation Exposure" established by the Japan Health Physics Society, which examines the parameters employed in the codes and the calculation results, and summarizes the future prospects of the codes. In order to calculate cumulative excess risk (CER) as a measure of lifetime risk with confidence intervals, a variance-covariance matrix for the parameters of the risk model is required. However, in a study conducted by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation using the regression analysis program Epicure on large-scale epidemiological data from A-bomb survivors, the variance-covariance matrix was not disclosed. Therefore, in this study, we independently derived parameters and covariance matrices using a generalized linear model (GLM) and confirmed that the parameter values agreed well with the Epicure results. The CERs calculated using the derived parameters and covariance matrices were compared with those calculated by the U.S. code RadRAT. Although a simple comparison is not possible due to the different population baselines of the two codes, they were found to be in general agreement. The developed code is expected to contribute to the discussion of influence factors and uncertainty in risk assessment.