ArticleRadiological physics and technology2021
Dosimetric comparison between different tangential field arrangements during left-sided breast cancer radiotherapy.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge-based treatment planning in breast cancer radiotherapy: comparing different machine learning algorithms.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate variations in dose distribution within the target volume and dose received by the organs at risk (OARs) for different tangential field arrangements during three-dimensional (3D) conformal treatment planning for left-sided breast cancer. Computed tomography (CT) images of 25 breast cancer patients were included, and three different mono-isocentric half-block (MIHB) treatment plans-parallel central axis technique (PCAXT), posterior border parallel technique (PBPT), and parallel quadrant technique (PQUDT)-were considered for each patient. The dosimetric and geometric parameters related to each followed plan were then extracted for the planning target volume (PTV) and the OARs, and compared. The results showed no significant differences among the extracted dosimetric and geometric parameters of the OARs for the different plans, while the 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.