ArticleMedical physics2022
Radiation quality correction factors for improved dosimetry in preclinical minibeam radiotherapy.
Article in Medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Roadmap for the implementation of particle minibeam therapy.Medical physics · 2026Review
- Feasibility of prototype diamond detectors for pulsed UHDR PBS small-field proton dosimetry for proton FLASH experiments.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025Article
- Proton minibeam radiotherapy: a review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Comprehensive dosimetric commissioning of proton minibeam radiotherapy on a single gantry proton system.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Design and dosimetric characterization of a transportable proton minibeam collimation system.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Radiation quality correction factors for improved dosimetry in preclinical minibeam radiotherapy.Medical physics · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn reference dosimetry, radiation quality correction factors are used in order to account for changes in the detector's response among different radiation qualities, improving dosimetric accuracy. PURPOSE: Reference dosimetry radiation quality corrections factors for the PTW microDiamond were calculated for preclinical X-ray and proton minibeams, and their impact in dosimetric accuracy was evaluated.
methodsA formalism for the calculation of radiation quality correction factors for absolute dosimetry in minibeam fields was developed. Following our formalism, radiation quality correction factors were calculated for the PTW microDiamond detector, using the Monte Carlo method. Models of the detector, and X-ray and proton irradiation platform, were imported into the TOPAS Monte Carlo simulation toolkit. The radiation quality correction factors were calculated in the following scenarios: (i) reference dosimetry open field to minibeam center of the central peak, (ii) different positions at the minibeam profile (along the peaks and valleys direction) to the center of the central minibeam, and (iii) some representative depth positions. In addition, the radiation quality correction factors needed for the calculation of the peak-to-valley dose ratio at different depths were calculated.
resultsAn important overestimation of the dose (about 10%) was found in the case of the open to minibeam field for both X-rays and proton beams, when the correction factors were used. Smaller differences were observed in the other cases.
conclusionsThe usage of the PTW microDiamond detector requires radiation quality correction factors in order to be used in minibeam reference dosimetry.
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.