Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34342124›Full record

GuidelineJournal of applied clinical medical physics2021

Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) 11.a: Plan and chart review in external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy.

Ping Xia, Benjamin J Sintay, Valdir C Colussi, Cynthia Chuang, Yeh-Chi Lo, Deborah Schofield, Michelle Wells, Sumin Zhou

Open access · goldAbstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. AAPM medical physics practice guideline 13.a: HDR brachytherapy, part B.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025
    Guideline
  2. AAPM-RSS Medical Physics Practice Guideline 9.b: SRS-SBRT.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025
    Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Guideline
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Simulation training in radiation oncology.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. PRIMO Monte Carlo software as a tool for commissioning of an external beam radiotherapy treatment planning system.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2023
    Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Ping XiaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Benjamin J SintayDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Cone Health, Greensboro, North Carolina, USA.
Valdir C ColussiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Cynthia ChuangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Yeh-Chi LoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai Hospital- New York, New York, New York, USA.
Deborah SchofieldDepartment of Radiation Oncology, AdventHealth Orlando, Orlando, Florida, USA.
Michelle WellsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Piedmont Healthcare, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Sumin ZhouDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.
AdventHealth East Orlando · USCleveland Clinic · USCone Health · USMount Sinai Hospital · USPiedmont HealthCare · USStanford University · USUniversity Hospitals of Cleveland · USUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A therapeutic medical physicist is responsible for reviewing radiation therapy treatment plans and patient charts, including initial treatment plans and new chart review, on treatment chart (weekly) review, and end of treatment chart review for both external beam radiation and brachytherapy. Task group report TG 275 examined this topic using a risk-based approach to provide a thorough analysis and guidance for best practice. Considering differences in resources and workflows of various clinical practice settings, the Professional Council of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine assembled this task group to develop a practice guideline on the same topic to provide a minimum standard that balances an appropriate level of safety and resource utilization. This medical physics practice guidelines (MPPG) thus provides a concise set of recommendations for medical physicists and other clinical staff regarding the review of treatment plans and patient charts while providing specific recommendations about who to be involved, and when/what to check in the chart review process. The recommendations, particularly those related to the initial plan review process, are critical for preventing errors and ensuring smooth clinical workflow. We believe that an effective review process for high-risk items should include multiple layers with collective efforts across the department. Therefore, in this report, we make specific recommendations for various roles beyond medical physicists. The recommendations of this MPPG have been reviewed and endorsed by the American Society of Radiologic Technologists and the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

Indexed as

BrachytherapyHumansPhysicsRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedResearch ReportSocietiesUnited StatesMPPG 11.aplan and chart reviewsafety and quality

Identifiers

PMID34342124
PMCPMC8425907
OpenAlexW3191502083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.