Does assessment of personal exposure matter during experimental neurocognitive testing in MRI-related magnetic fields?
Files
Publication date
2015-02
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
taverne
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether the use of quantitative personal exposure measurements in experimental research would result in better estimates of the associations between static and time-varying magnetic field exposure and neurocognitive test performance than when exposure categories were based solely on distance to the magnetic field source. METHODS: In our original analysis, based on distance to the magnet of a 7 T MRI scanner, an effect of exposure to static magnetic fields was observed. We performed a sensitivity analysis of test performance on a reaction task and line bisection task with different exposure measures that were derived from personal real-time measurements. RESULTS: The exposure measures were highly comparable, and almost all models resulted in significant associations between exposure to time-varying magnetic fields within a static magnetic field and performance on a reaction and line bisection task. CONCLUSION: In a controlled experimental setup, distance to the bore is a good proxy for personal exposure when placing subjects at fixed positions with standardized head movements in the magnetic stray fields of a 7 T MRI. Use of a magnetic field dosimeter is, however, important for estimating quantitative exposure response associations.
Keywords
Adult, Cognition, Cross-Over Studies, Double-Blind Method, Environmental Exposure, Female, Humans, Magnetic Fields, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Radiation Dosage, Radiometry, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity, Taverne
Citation
van Nierop, L E, Christopher-de Vries, Y, Slottje, P & Kromhout, H 2015, 'Does assessment of personal exposure matter during experimental neurocognitive testing in MRI-related magnetic fields?', Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 765-772. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.25173