ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024
A comparison of three-film analysis software for stereotactic radiotherapy patient-specific quality assurance.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- FilmQADose: Open-source software for radiochromic film dosimetry.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Efficacy and clinical use of novel high-resolution EPID-based 2D and 3D automated patient-specific quality assurance for SRS and SBRT patients.Radiation and environmental biophysics · 2026Article
- A review on radiochromic film dosimetry in radiation therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Review
- A comparison of three-film analysis software for stereotactic radiotherapy patient-specific quality assurance.Journal of applied clinical 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study was to investigate the suitability of three radiochromic film analysis software for stereotactic radiotherapy patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA): FilmQA Pro v5.0, SNC Patient v6.2, and eFilmQA v5.0.
methodsFilm calibration was conducted for each software followed by three sets of measurements. The first set assessed calibration accuracy by comparing measured and delivered doses at increments different from those used for calibration. The second set used each software to conduct PSQA through gamma analysis on 10 stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) patients. The third set utilized SNC Patient and eFilmQA to carry out gamma analysis on a collection of four digital test images, eliminating delivery and scanning uncertainties from impacting the analysis. Key supporting features within each software for conducting gamma analysis were identified.
resultsOverall, FilmQA Pro and eFilmQA were deemed comparable and favoured over SNC Patient due to the presence of key features such as triple-channel dosimetry, auto-optimization, and dose scaling. FilmQA Pro has a substantial user base and established reputation. eFilmQA, having been introduced more recently, serves as a viable alternative to FilmQA Pro, having been further refined for stereotactic radiotherapy PSQA.
conclusionThis study investigated the suitability of three film analysis software (FilmQA Pro, eFilmQA, and SNC Patient) for stereotactic radiotherapy PSQA. Results from the investigation indicated that both FilmQA Pro and eFilmQA are comparably suitable and are preferred over SNC Patient. Both FilmQA Pro and eFilmQA are recommended for radiotherapy clinics.
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.