ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2019
Characteristics of the Exradin W1 scintillator in the magnetic field.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of magnetic field on a novel scintillation dosimeter in a 1.5 T MR-linac.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Characterization of an inorganic scintillator for small-field dosimetry in MR-guided radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2020Article
- Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To investigate the angular dependency of the W1 scintillator with and without a magnetic field, the beam incidence angles to the detector varied from 0° to 360° at intervals of 30° when the detector was pointed in both the craniocaudal and right-to-left directions. The beam incidence angles also varied from 0° to 360° at intervals of 45° when the W1 scintillator was in the anterior-to-posterior direction. To investigate the field size dependency of the W1 scintillator with and without a magnetic field, the doses by an identical beam-on time were measured at various square field sizes and the measured doses were normalized to the dose at the field of 10.5 cm × 10.5 cm (FS10.5). With and without a magnetic field, the deviations of the doses to the dose at the beam incident angle of 0° were always less than 1% regardless of the dosimeter positioning relative to the magnetic field direction. When the field sizes were equal to or less than FS10.5, the differences in the output factors with and without a magnetic field were less than 0.7%. However, those were larger than 1% at fields larger than FS10.5, and up to 3.1%. The W1 scintillator showed no angular dependency to the magnetic field. Differences larger than 1% in the output factors with and without a magnetic field were observed at field sizes larger than 10.5 cm × 10.5 cm.
Indexed as
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.