ArticleJournal of radiation research2017
Multicentre dose audit for clinical trials of radiation therapy in Asia.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2017. 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A dose audit of 16 facilities in 11 countries has been performed within the framework of the Forum for Nuclear Cooperation in Asia (FNCA) quality assurance program. The quality of radiation dosimetry varies because of the large variation in radiation therapy among the participating countries. One of the most important aspects of international multicentre clinical trials is uniformity of absolute dose between centres. The National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS) in Japan has conducted a dose audit of participating countries since 2006 by using radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeters (RGDs). RGDs have been successfully applied to a domestic postal dose audit in Japan. The authors used the same audit system to perform a dose audit of the FNCA countries. The average and standard deviation of the relative deviation between the measured and intended dose among 46 beams was 0.4% and 1.5% (k = 1), respectively. This is an excellent level of uniformity for the multicountry data. However, of the 46 beams measured, a single beam exceeded the permitted tolerance level of ±5%. We investigated the cause for this and solved the problem. This event highlights the importance of external audits in radiation therapy.
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.