Developing quality assurance tests for simultaneous Positron Emission Tomography - Magnetic Resonance imaging for radiotherapy planning.

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.

1. A combined automatic organ at risk contouring and synthetic Computed Tomography solution for pelvic Magnetic Resonance-only radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026
   Article
2. Evaluating a radiotherapy deep learning synthetic CT algorithm for PET-MR attenuation correction in the pelvis.EJNMMI physics · 2024
   Article
3. A Review on the Use of Imaging Biomarkers in Oncology Clinical Trials: Quality Assurance Strategies for Technical Validation.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023
   Review
4. Clinical use of positron emission tomography for radiotherapy planning - Medical physics considerations.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2023
   Review

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.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as