ArticleJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2020
Dosimetric comparison of two different applicators and rectal retraction methods used in inverse optimization-based intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer.
Article in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of rectal retractor use on dosimetric parameters, treatment-related adverse events, and clinical outcomes of cervical cancer brachytherapy: A retrospective tertiary-centre study.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2027Article
- A Retrospective Analysis Comparing the Dosimetric Parameters of Two Rectum-Sparing Techniques During Intracavitary Brachytherapy with Tandem-Ring Applicators for Cervical Cancer.Cancer management and research · 2025Article
- Dosimetric comparison of rectal dose-reductive techniques in intra-cavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer: A retrospective analysis.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2023Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric differences between two different applicators and rectal-retraction methods used in image-guided brachytherapy (IGBT) for locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). MATERIAL AND
methodsTen patients with LACC treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy and inverse optimization-based IGBT were included in this study. In each patient, at least one fraction of IGBT was performed using tandem-ovoids (TO) with vaginal gauze packing (VGP) or tandem-ring (TR) with rectal-retractor (RR). High-risk clinical target volume (CTV
resultsThere were no significant differences in D
conclusionsThe results showed that there were no statistically differences in D
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.