Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29441251›Full record

ArticleCureus2017

Self-Shielding Analysis of the Zap-X System.

Georg A Weidlich, M Bret Schneider, John R Adler

Erratum issuedOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Determination of the beam quality correction factorJournal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Georg A WeidlichRadiation Oncology, National Medical Physics and Dosimetry Comp., Inc.
M Bret SchneiderZap Surgical Systems, Inc., Stanford University.
John R AdlerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine.
Ehime Medical Center · JPStanford Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Zap-X is a self-contained and first-of-its-kind self-shielded therapeutic radiation device dedicated to brain as well as head and neck stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). By utilizing an S-band linear accelerator (linac) with a 2.7 megavolt (MV) accelerating potential and incorporating radiation-shielded mechanical structures, the Zap-X does not typically require a radiation bunker, thereby saving SRS facilities considerable cost. At the same time, the self-shielded features of the Zap-X are designed for more consistency of radiation protection, reducing the risk to radiation workers and others potentially exposed from a poorly designed or constructed radiotherapy vault. The hypothesis of the present study is that a radiosurgical system can be self-shielded such that it produces radiation exposure levels deemed safe to the public while operating under a full clinical workload. This study summarizes the Zap-X system shielding and found that the overall system radiation leakage values are reduced by a factor of 50 compared to the occupational radiation limit stipulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) or agreement states. The goal of self-shielding is achieved under all but the most exceptional conditions for which additional room shielding or a larger restricted area in the vicinity of the Zap-X system would be required.

Indexed as

radiationradiation exposureradiation shieldingself-shieldedstereotactic radiosurgery

Identifiers

PMID29441251
PMCPMC5800761
OpenAlexW2771426008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.