ArticleJournal of radiation research2023
Evaluation of OrthoChromic OC-1 films for photon radiotherapy application.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Response characterization of radiochromic OC-1 films in photon, electron, and proton beams.Medical physics · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
A new film dosimetry system consists of the new OrthoChromic™ OC-1 film, and a novel calibration procedure was evaluated. Two films, C1 and C2, were exposed simultaneously using the 6FFF beam with a step-wedge pattern of five steps ranging from 590 to 3000 cGy. C1 was used for calibration, and C2 was used for calibration curve validation. The second scan of C2 was done by rotating the film by 90-deg. To evaluate the effectiveness of the non-uniform scanner response correction with the new system, a film was exposed to a 20 × 20 cm2 field. The beam profile measured with the film was compared to the IBA cc04 measurements in water. Films were irradiated to characterize the energy response, dynamic range and temporal growth effect. Open (MLC-defined) and clinical fields were radiated to evaluate the overall performance of the new system. The new calibration procedure was validated with an average dose difference of 1.6% and a gamma (2%,2 mm) passing rate of 100%. With C2 scanned 90-deg rotated, the average dose difference was 1.3%. The average difference between cc04 and film was 0.4%. The St between films and diode/cc04 were within -0.3% difference for 1 × 1 to 14 × 14 cm2 and -2.8% for 0.5 × 0.5 cm2. For clinical fields, the average gamma (3%,2 mm) was 98.8%. These results were consistent with EBT3 film and MapCheck measurements with a dose > 400 cGy. The results have shown that the OC-1 film system can achieve accurate results for QA measurements, but more considerable uncertainty was observed within the low dose range.
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.