ArticleBioMed research international2015
Assessment of Random Error in Phantom Dosimetry with the Use of Error Simulation in Statistical Software.
Article in BioMed research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate if software simulation is practical for quantifying random error (RE) in phantom dosimetry. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe applied software error simulation to an existing dosimetry study. The specifications and the measurement values of this study were brought into the software (R version 3.0.2) together with the algorithm of the calculation of the effective dose (E). Four sources of RE were specified: (1) the calibration factor; (2) the background radiation correction; (3) the read-out process of the dosimeters; and (4) the fluctuation of the X-ray generator.
resultsThe amount of RE introduced by these sources was calculated on the basis of the experimental values and the mathematical rules of error propagation. The software repeated the calculations of E multiple times (n = 10,000) while attributing the applicable RE to the experimental values. A distribution of E emerged as a confidence interval around an expected value.
conclusionsCredible confidence intervals around E in phantom dose studies can be calculated by using software modelling of the experiment. With credible confidence intervals, the statistical significance of differences between protocols can be substantiated or rejected. This modelling software can also be used for a power analysis when planning phantom dose experiments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.