Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28140787›Full record

ArticleRadiation research2017

Scattered Dose Calculations and Measurements in a Life-Like Mouse Phantom.

David Welch, Leah Turner, Michael Speiser, Gerhard Randers-Pehrson, David J Brenner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Preclinical dosimetry: exploring the use of small animal phantoms.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2019
    Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

David Welcha   Center for Radiological Research, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Leah Turnera   Center for Radiological Research, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Michael Speiserb   Englewood Hospital and Medical Center, Englewood, New Jersey.
Gerhard Randers-Pehrsona   Center for Radiological Research, Columbia University, New York, New York.
David J Brennera   Center for Radiological Research, Columbia University, New York, New York.

Funding

Sample Engineering CoreU19AI067773 · NIAID · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI FORNACE, ALBERT J · 2005 to 2024
$105.4M
NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI067773
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anatomically accurate phantoms are useful tools for radiation dosimetry studies. In this work, we demonstrate the construction of a new generation of life-like mouse phantoms in which the methods have been generalized to be applicable to the fabrication of any small animal. The mouse phantoms, with built-in density inhomogeneity, exhibit different scattering behavior dependent on where the radiation is delivered. Computer models of the mouse phantoms and a small animal irradiation platform were devised in Monte Carlo N-Particle code (MCNP). A baseline test replicating the irradiation system in a computational model shows minimal differences from experimental results from 50 Gy down to 0.1 Gy. We observe excellent agreement between scattered dose measurements and simulation results from X-ray irradiations focused at either the lung or the abdomen within our phantoms. This study demonstrates the utility of our mouse phantoms as measurement tools with the goal of using our phantoms to verify complex computational models.

Indexed as

Scattering, RadiationAnimalsBiomimetic MaterialsComputer SimulationEquipment DesignEquipment Failure AnalysisMiceModels, BiologicalPhantoms, ImagingRadiation DosageRadiometryReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedWhole-Body Irradiation

Identifiers

PMID28140787
PMCPMC5525046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.