ArticleMedical physics2020
High spatial resolution inorganic scintillator detector for high-energy X-ray beam at small field irradiation.
Article in Medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review of Cherenkov imaging technology advances in radiotherapy: single-photon-level imaging in high ambient light and radiation backgrounds.Biophotonics discovery · 2024Review
- Characteristics of a plastic scintillation detector in photon beam dosimetry.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Characterization of Inorganic Scintillator Detectors for Dosimetry in Image-Guided Small Animal Radiotherapy Platforms.Cancers · 2023Article
- A novel QA phantom based on scintillating fiber ribbons with implementation of 2D dose tomography for small-field radiotherapy.Medical physics · 2023Article
- Evaluation and Comparison of Dosimetric Characteristics of SemiflexJournal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2022Article
- Point Dosimetry in Patient-specific Quality Assurance of a Robotic Radiosurgery System Using a Scintillation Detector.Journal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSmall field dosimetry for radiotherapy is one of the major challenges due to the size of most dosimeters, for example, sufficient spatial resolution, accurate dose distribution and energy dependency of the detector. In this context, the purpose of this research is to develop a small size scintillating detector targeting small field dosimetry and compare its performance with other commercial detectors.
methodAn inorganic scintillator detector (ISD) of about 200 µm outer diameter was developed and tested through different small field dosimetric characterizations under high-energy photons (6 and 15 MV) delivered by an Elekta Linear Accelerator (LINAC). Percentage depth dose (PDD) and beam profile measurements were compared using dosimeters from PTW namely, microdiamond and PinPoint three-dimensional (PP3D) detector. A background fiber method has been considered to quantitate and eliminate the minimal Cerenkov effect from the total optical signal magnitude. Measurements were performed inside a water phantom under IAEA Technical Reports Series recommendations (IAEA TRS 381 and TRS 483).
resultsSmall fields ranging from 3 × 3 cm
conclusionsThe developed detector can be used to accurately measure the delivered dose at small fields during the treatment of small volume tumors. The author's measurement shows that despite using a nonwater-equivalent detector, the detector can be a powerful candidate for beam characterization and quality assurance in, for example, radiosurgery, Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT), and brachytherapy. Our detector can provide real-time dose measurement and good spatial resolution with immediate readout, simplicity, flexibility, and robustness.
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.