Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28932174›Full record

ReviewReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology

Internet-based computer technology on radiotherapy.

James C L Chow

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Use of social media in radiation oncology: multicenter data from the GOCO Group.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

1 author.

James C L ChowDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto and Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 2M9, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent rapid development of Internet-based computer technologies has made possible many novel applications in radiation dose delivery. However, translational speed of applying these new technologies in radiotherapy could hardly catch up due to the complex commissioning process and quality assurance protocol. Implementing novel Internet-based technology in radiotherapy requires corresponding design of algorithm and infrastructure of the application, set up of related clinical policies, purchase and development of software and hardware, computer programming and debugging, and national to international collaboration. Although such implementation processes are time consuming, some recent computer advancements in the radiation dose delivery are still noticeable. In this review, we will present the background and concept of some recent Internet-based computer technologies such as cloud computing, big data processing and machine learning, followed by their potential applications in radiotherapy, such as treatment planning and dose delivery. We will also discuss the current progress of these applications and their impacts on radiotherapy. We will explore and evaluate the expected benefits and challenges in implementation as well.

Indexed as

Big dataCloud computingComputer technologyMachine learningRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID28932174
PMCPMC5596257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.