Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29616836›Full record

ReviewThe British journal of radiology2019

Normal tissue damage: its importance, history and challenges for the future.

Jacqueline P Williams, Wayne Newhauser

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The British journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Saving normal tissues - a goal for the ages.International journal of radiation biology · 2019
    Review
  8. Review
  9. 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

2 authors.

Jacqueline P WilliamsDepartments of Environmental Medicine and Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Wayne NewhauserDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sir Oliver Scott, a philanthropist and radiation biologist and, therefore, the epitome of a gentleman and a scholar, was an early Director of the BECC Radiobiology Research Unit at Mount Vernon. His tenure preceded that of Jack Fowler, with both contributing to basic, translational and clinical thought and application in radiation across the globe. With respect to this review, Fowler's name in particular has remained synonymous with the use of models, both animal and mathematical, that assess and quantify the biological mechanisms that underlie radiation-associated normal tissue toxicities. An understanding of these effects is critical to the optimal use of radiation therapy in the clinic; however, the role that basic sciences play in clinical practice has been undergoing considerable change in recent years, particularly in the USA, where there has been a growing emphasis on engineering and imaging to improve radiation delivery, with empirical observations of clinical outcome taking the place of models underpinned by evidence from basic science experiments. In honour of Scott and Fowler's work, we have taken this opportunity to review how our respective fields of radiation biology and radiation physics have intertwined over the years, affecting the clinical use of radiation with respect to normal tissue outcomes. We discuss the past and current achievements, with the hope of encouraging a revived interest in physics and biology as they relate to radiation oncology practice, since, like Scott and Fowler, we share the goal of improving the future outlook for cancer patients.

Indexed as

AnimalsFemaleForecastingHumansMaleNeoplasmsRadiation InjuriesRadiation OncologyRadiobiologyRadiotherapyRadiotherapy DosageReference Values

Identifiers

PMID29616836
PMCPMC6435079

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.