ArticleMedical physics2022
On the measurement uncertainty of microdosimetric quantities using diamond and silicon microdosimeters in carbon-ion beams.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A standardized measurement-based approach to estimate modelled relative biological effectiveness for auditing carbon ion beams.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Measurement of microdosimetric spectra of high-LET particle beams using the ENCORE detector.Medical physics · 2025Article
- On the measurement uncertainty of microdosimetric quantities using diamond and silicon microdosimeters in carbon-ion beams.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
9 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this paper is to compare the response of two different types of solid-state microdosimeters, that is, silicon and diamond, and their uncertainties. A study of the conversion of silicon microdosimetric spectra to the diamond equivalent for microdosimeters with different geometry of the sensitive volumes is performed, including the use of different stopping power databases.
methodDiamond and silicon microdosimeters were irradiated under the same conditions, aligned at the same depth in a carbon-ion beam at the MedAustron ion therapy center. In order to estimate the microdosimetric quantities, the readout electronic linearity was investigated with three different methods, that is, the first being a single linear regression, the second consisting of a double linear regression with a channel transition and last a multiple linear regression by splitting the data into odd and even groups. The uncertainty related to each of these methods was estimated as well. The edge calibration was performed using the intercept with the horizontal axis of the tangent through the inflection point of the Fermi function approximation multi-channel analyzer spectrum. It was assumed that this point corresponds to the maximum energy difference of particle traversing the sensitive volume (SV) for which the residual range difference in the continuous slowing down approximation is equal to the thickness of the SV of the microdosimeter. Four material conversion methods were explored, the edge method, the density method, the maximum-deposition energy method and the bin-by-bin transformation method. The uncertainties of the microdosimetric quantities resulting from the linearization, the edge calibration and the detectors thickness were also estimated.
resultsIt was found that the double linear regression had the lowest uncertainty for both microdosimeters. The propagated standard (k = 1) uncertainties on the frequency-mean lineal energy
conclusionThis article demonstrate that the linearity of the readout electronics affects the microdosimetric spectra with a difference in
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.