ArticleJournal of radiation research2020
Japanese structure survey of radiation oncology in 2012.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Japanese national survey on IMRT/SBRT in 2023 by the JASTRO High-Precision External Beam Radiotherapy Group.Journal of radiation research · 2025Article
- Clinical workload profile of medical physics professionals at particle therapy Centers: a National Survey in Japan.Journal of radiation research · 2025Article
- A national survey on the medical physics workload of external beam radiotherapy in Japan†.Journal of radiation research · 2023Article
- Japanese structure survey of radiation oncology in 2015.Journal of radiation research · 2022Article
- Japanese structure survey of radiation oncology in 2013.Journal of radiation research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper describes the ongoing structure of radiation oncology in Japan in terms of equipment, personnel, patient load and geographic distribution to identify and overcome any existing limitations. From March 2013 to August 2016, the Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology conducted a questionnaire based on the Japanese national structure survey of radiation oncology in 2012. Data were analyzed based on the institutional stratification by the annual number of new patients treated with radiotherapy per institution. The estimated annual numbers of new and total (new plus repeat) patients treated with radiation were 213 000 and 251 000, respectively. Additionally, the estimated cancer incidence was 865 238 cases with ~24.6% of all newly diagnosed patients being treated with radiation. The types and numbers of treatment devices actually used included linear accelerator (LINAC; n = 864), telecobalt (n = 0), Gamma Knife (n = 44), 60Co remote afterloading system (RALS; n = 23) and 192Ir RALS (n = 130). The LINAC system used dual-energy functions in 651 units, 3D conformal radiotherapy functions in 759 and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) functions in 466. There were 792 Japan Radiological Society/Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology-certified radiation oncologists, 1061.6 full-time equivalent (FTE) radiation oncologists, 2124.2 FTE radiotherapy technologists, 181.3 FTE medical physicists, 170.9 FTE radiotherapy quality managers and 841.5 FTE nurses. The frequency of IMRT use significantly increased during this time. In conclusion, the Japanese structure of radiation oncology has clearly improved in terms of equipment and utility although there was a shortage of personnel in 2012.
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.