Recently, several compilations of individual radiation epidemiology study results have aimed to obtain direct evidence on the magnitudes of dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks. These compilations have relied on meta-analyses of ratios of risks from low dose-rate studies and matched risks from the solid cancer Excess Relative Risk models fitted to the acutely exposed Japanese A-bomb cohort. The purpose here is to demonstrate how choices of methodology for evaluating dose-rate effects on radiation-related cancer risks may influence the results reported for dose-rate effects. The current analysis is intended to address methodological issues and does not imply that the authors recommend a particular value for the dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor. A set of 22 results from one recent published study has been adopted here as a test set of data for applying the many different methods described here, that nearly all produced highly consistent results. Some recently voiced concerns, involving the recalling of the well-known theoretical point—the ratio of two normal random variables has a theoretically unbounded variance—that could potentially cause issues, are shown to be unfounded when aimed at the published work cited and examined in detail here. In the calculation of dose-rate effects for radiation protection purposes, it is recommended that meta-estimators should retain the full epidemiological and dosimetric matching information between the risks from the individual low dose-rate studies and the acutely exposed A-bomb cohort and that a regression approach can be considered as a useful alternative to current approaches.

最近，一些个体辐射流行病学研究结果的汇编旨在获得有关剂量率对辐射相关癌症风险影响程度的直接证据。这些汇编依赖于低剂量率研究的风险比率的荟萃分析，以及适用于急性暴露的日本原子弹队列的实体癌超额相对风险模型的匹配风险。此处的目的是展示评估辐射相关癌症风险的剂量率效应的方法选择如何影响报告的剂量率效应结果。目前的分析旨在解决方法问题，并不意味着作者推荐了剂量和剂量率有效性因子的特定值。此处采用了来自最近发表的一项研究的一组 22 个结果作为测试数据集，用于应用此处描述的许多不同方法，这些方法几乎都产生了高度一致的结果。一些最近表达的担忧，包括回忆众所周知的理论点——两个正态随机变量的比率在理论上具有无限的方差——这可能会导致问题，当针对已发表的工作时被证明是没有根据的详细在这里。在计算辐射防护的剂量率效应时，