Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34025743›Full record

ReviewJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2021

A review of brachytherapy physical phantoms developed over the last 20 years: clinical purpose and future requirements.

Sarah Wilby, Antony Palmer, Wojciech Polak, Andrea Bucchi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sarah WilbyDepartment of Radiotherapy Physics, Clinical Hematology, and Oncology Centre, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Cosham, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Antony PalmerDepartment of Radiotherapy Physics, Clinical Hematology, and Oncology Centre, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Cosham, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Wojciech PolakDepartment of Radiotherapy Physics, Clinical Hematology, and Oncology Centre, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Cosham, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Andrea BucchiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Technology University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Within the brachytherapy community, many phantoms are constructed in-house, and less commercial development is observed as compared to the field of external beam. Computational or virtual phantom design has seen considerable growth; however, physical phantoms are beneficial for brachytherapy, in which quality is dependent on physical processes, such as accuracy of source placement. Focusing on the design of physical phantoms, this review paper presents a summary of brachytherapy specific phantoms in published journal articles over the last twenty years (January 1, 2000 - December 31, 2019). The papers were analyzed and tabulated by their primary clinical purpose, which was deduced from their associated publications. A substantial body of work has been published on phantom designs from the brachytherapy community, but a standardized method of reporting technical aspects of the phantoms is lacking. In-house phantom development demonstrates an increasing interest in magnetic resonance (MR) tissue mimicking materials, which is not yet reflected in commercial phantoms available for brachytherapy. The evaluation of phantom design provides insight into the way, in which brachytherapy practice has changed over time, and demonstrates the customised and broad nature of treatments offered.

Indexed as

brachytherapyphantomstest object

Identifiers

PMID34025743
PMCPMC8117707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.