Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38011008›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024

Influence of magnetic field on a novel scintillation dosimeter in a 1.5 T MR-linac.

Stijn Oolbekkink, Bram van Asselen, Simon J Woodings, Jochem W H Wolthaus, J H Wilfred de Vries, Adriaan A van Appeldoorn, Marcos Feijoo, Madelon van den Dobbelsteen, Bas W Raaymakers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Stijn OolbekkinkDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2948-6134
Bram van AsselenDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Simon J WoodingsDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jochem W H WolthausDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J H Wilfred de VriesDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Adriaan A van AppeldoornDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marcos FeijooBlue Physics, Lutz, Florida, USA.
Madelon van den DobbelsteenDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9671-8062
Bas W RaaymakersDepartment of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

European Metrology Programme for Innovation and Research 19NRM01Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 18495
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For commissioning and quality assurance for adaptive workflows on the MR-linac, a dosimeter which can measure time-resolved dose during MR image acquisition is desired. The Blue Physics model 10 scintillation dosimeter is potentially an ideal detector for such measurements. However, some detectors can be influenced by the magnetic field of the MR-linac. To assess the calibration methods and magnetic field dependency of the Blue Physics scintillator in the 1.5 T MR-linac. Several calibration methods were assessed for robustness. Detector characteristics and the influence of the calibration methods were assessed based on dose reproducibility, dose linearity, dose rate dependency, relative output factor (ROF), percentage depth dose profile, axial rotation and the radial detector orientation with respect to the magnetic field. The potential application of time-resolved dynamic dose measurements during MRI acquisition was assessed. A variation of calibration factors was observed for different calibration methods. Dose reproducibility, dose linearity and dose rate stability were all found to be within tolerance and were not significantly affected by different calibration methods. Measurements with the detector showed good correspondence with reference chambers. The ROF and radial orientation dependence measurements were influenced by the calibration method used. Axial detector dependence was assessed and relative readout differences of up to 2.5% were observed. A maximum readout difference of 10.8% was obtained when rotating the detector with respect to the magnetic field. Importantly, measurements with and without MR image acquisition were consistent for both static and dynamic situations. The Blue Physics scintillation detector is suitable for relative dosimetry in the 1.5 T MR-linac when measurements are within or close to calibration conditions.

Indexed as

Particle AcceleratorsRadiation DosimetersHumansMagnetic FieldsMagnetic Resonance ImagingPhantoms, ImagingRadiometryReproducibility of ResultsMRI-linacradiotherapyscintillation dosimetrytime-resolved dosimetry

Identifiers

PMID38011008
PMCPMC10795437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.