ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
FMEA of MR-Only Treatment Planning in the Pelvis.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of prospective hazard analysis in radiation therapy.Medical physics · 2025Pooled it
- MR-PROTECT: Clinical feasibility of a prostate MRI-only radiotherapy treatment workflow and investigation of acceptance criteria.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020Trial
- Phantom benchmarking for quality assurance of synthetic computed tomography in cranial magnetic resonance-only radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Risk assessment and quality management in AIO based on CT-linac for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: An improved FMEA and FTA approach.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Process mapping with failure mode and effects analysis to identify determinants of implementation in healthcare settings: a guide.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- AAPM Task Group 334: A guidance document to using radiotherapy immobilization devices and accessories in an MR environment.Medical physics · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Hounsfield unit assignment and dose differences between CT-based standard and deep learning-based synthetic CT images for MRI-only radiation therapy of the head and neck.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Digitalization enhancement in the pharmaceutical supply network using a supply chain risk management approach.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Patient-specific quality assurance strategies for synthetic computed tomography in magnetic resonance-only radiotherapy of the abdomen.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process-based risk priority number for risk assessments of commissioning process of a ring gantry LINAC.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Identifying risk characteristics using failure mode and effect analysis for risk management in online magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiation therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2022Article
- Application of Integrated Emergency Care Model Based on Failure Modes and Effects Analysis in Patients With Ischemic Stroke.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Proactive Risk Assessment Through Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) for Haemodialysis Facilities: A Pilot Project.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Task group 284 report: magnetic resonance imaging simulation in radiotherapy: considerations for clinical implementation, optimization, and quality assurance.Medical physics · 2021Article
- A Modular System for Treating Moving Anatomical Targets With Scanned Ion Beams at Multiple Facilities: Pre-Clinical Testing for Quality and Safety of Beam Delivery.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Performance of deep learning synthetic CTs for MR-only brain radiation therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2021Article
- Clinical experience and workflow challenges with magnetic resonance-only radiation therapy simulation and planning for prostate cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2020Article
- Bulk Anatomical Density Based Dose Calculation for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance of MRI-Only Prostate Radiotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- A Multi-center Prospective Study for Implementation of an MRI-Only Prostate Treatment Planning Workflow.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the implementation of a magnetic resonance (MR)-only workflow (ie, implementing MR simulation as the primary planning modality) using failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) in comparison with a conventional multimodality (MR simulation in conjunction with computed tomography simulation) workflow for pelvis external beam planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: To perform the FMEA, a multidisciplinary 9-member team was assembled and developed process maps, identified potential failure modes (FMs), and assigned numerical values to the severity (S), frequency of occurrence (O), and detectability (D) of those FMs. Risk priority numbers (RPNs) were calculated via the product of S, O, and D as a metric for evaluating relative patient risk. An alternative 3-digit composite number (SOD) was computed to emphasize high-severity FMs. Fault tree analysis identified the causality chain leading to the highest-severity FM.
resultsSeven processes were identified, 3 of which were shared between workflows. Image fusion and target delineation subprocesses using the conventional workflow added 9 and 10 FMs, respectively, with 6 RPNs >100. By contrast, synthetic computed tomography generation introduced 3 major subprocesses and propagated 46 unique FMs, 15 with RPNs >100. For the conventional workflow, the largest RPN scores were introduced by image fusion (RPN range, 120-192). For the MR-only workflow, the highest RPN scores were from inaccuracies in target delineation resulting from misinterpretation of MR images (RPN = 240) and insufficient management of patient- and system-level distortions (RPN = 210 and 168, respectively). Underestimation (RPN = 140) or overestimation (RPN = 192) of bone volume produced higher RPN scores. The highest SODs for both workflows were related to changes in target location because of internal anatomy changes (conventional = 961, MR-only = 822).
conclusionsFMEA identified areas for mitigating risk in MR-only pelvis RTP, and SODs identified high-severity process modes. Efforts to develop a quality management program to mitigate high FMs are underway.
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.