ArticleJournal of radiation research2022
Prediction of proton beam range in phantom with metals based on monochromatic energy CT images.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Photon-counting CT in cancer radiotherapy: technological advances and clinical benefits.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of monochromatic energy (MonoE) computed tomography (CT) images reconstructed by spectral CT in predicting the stopping power ratio $( SP{R}_w)$ of materials in the presence of metal. The CIRS062 phantom was scanned three times using spectral CT. In the first scan, a solid water insert was placed at the center of the phantom $(C{T}_{no\ metal})$. In the second scan, the solid water insert was replaced with a titanium alloy femoral head $(C{T}_{metal})$. The metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm was used in the last scan $(C{T}_{metal+ MAR})$. The MonoE-CT images of 40 keV and 80 keV were reconstructed. Finally, the single-energy CT method (SECT) and the dual-energy CT method (DECT) were used to calculate the $SP{R}_w$. The mean absolute error (MAE) of the $SP{R}_w$ of the inner layer inserts calculated by the SECT method were 3.19%, 13.88% and 2.71%, corresponding to $C{T}_{no\ metal}$, $C{T}_{metal}$ and $C{T}_{metal+ MAR}$, respectively. For the outer layer inserts, the MAE of $SP{R}_w$ were 3.43%, 5.42% and 2.99%, respectively. Using the DECT method, the MAE of the $SP{R}_w$ of the inner layer inserts was 1.30%, 3.69% and 1.46% and the MAE of the outer layer inserts- was 1.34%, 1.36% and 1.05%. The studies shows that, compared with the SECT method, the accuracy of the DECT method in predicting the $SP{R}_w$ of a material is more robust to the presence of metal. Using the MAR algorithm when performing CT scans can further improve the accuracy of predicting the SPR of materials in the presence of metal.
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.