Logo image
Acoustic output upper limits proposition: Should upper limits be retained?
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Acoustic output upper limits proposition: Should upper limits be retained?

William D O’Brien Jr, John G Abbott, Mel E Stratmeyer, Gerald R Harris, Mark E Schafer, Tariq A Siddiqi, Christopher R. B Merritt, Francis A Duck and Phillip J Bendick
Journal of ultrasound in medicine, v 21(12), pp 1335-1341
2002
PMID: 12494975

Abstract

Biological and medical sciences Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Medical sciences Miscellaneous. Technology Ultrasonic investigative techniques
t the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM) 2002 Annual Convention in Nashville, Tennessee, a point / counterpoint categorical course was presented on the topic of acoustic output upper limits. The course organizers were William D. O’Brien, Jr, PhD, John G. Abbott, PhD, and Mel E. Stratmeyer, PhD. The published course objective was as follows: The current limits on acoustic output were not derived from an analysis of health risks based on bioeffects data, nor were the limits derived from an analysis of the health benefits. Ideally, upper limits should be based on a risk-versus-benefit analysis. The speakers will explore possible impacts of removing limits, or altering current limits, on both risks and benefits. The pro and con positions were assigned to the speakers. The course started with an overview of the regulatory background. Then the 6 speakers for the pro and con positions were given 10 minutes each to argue the proposition of whether upper limits should be retained. Three organizational views were solicited: industry, medicine, and research, with a pro and con position for each organizational view. As a service to the medical ultrasound community, these individuals have provided the following commentaries based on their categorical course presentations. The guidelines for the pro and con commentaries were to limit their text to about 500 words. The regulatory background text was not limited to 500 words. The pro and con positions were assigned by the course organizers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the speakers or their organizations.

Metrics

6 Record Views
21 citations in Scopus

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

InCites Highlights

Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:

Collaboration types
Industry collaboration
Domestic collaboration
International collaboration
Web of Science research areas
Acoustics
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging
Logo image