ArticleBJR open2020
Clinical and practical considerations in the design of appropriate compensation schedules following treatment interruptions.
Article in BJR open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Radiotherapy treatment interruptions during the Covid-19 pandemic: The UK experience and implications for radiobiology training.Radiation physics and chemistry (Oxford, England : 1993) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Compensatory dose calculations to mitigate the deleterious effect of unscheduled treatment interruptions remain important. They may be increasingly required during and after epidemics, as with the present Covid-19 virus. The information presented to those involved in the actual dose estimations is often limited, thereby increasing the likelihood of confusion, further time delays and possibly incorrect decisions. This article sets out what aspects need to be considered by the Clinical Oncologist (or Radiation Oncologist), and the reasons why, in order to provide greater clarity. The key issues are: (a) the biological nature of the tumour (and hence its repopulation potential), (b) patient age and pre-existing medical risk factors that influence radiation tolerance, the use of chemotherapy, surgery etc, (c) the acceptable dose limits of the relevant normal tissues at risk and (d) consideration of the possibility of further field size adjustments, a change in treatment plan or acceptance of a greater role for alternative forms of radiation treatment (
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.