ArticleJournal of medical physics
Assessing Heterogeneity Effects on Points A, B, and Organs at Risk Doses in High-dose-Rate Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancer - A Comparison of
Article in Journal of medical physics. 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.
- Mapping cellular interactions and communication landscapes in cervical cancer via single-cell transcriptomics.Discover oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The present article deals with investigating the effects of tissue heterogeneity consideration on the dose distribution of Materials and Methods: A Monte Carlo N-Particle 5 (MCNP5) code was developed for the simulation of the dose distribution in homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms for cervical cancer patients. The phantoms represented water-equivalent and human body-equivalent tissues. Treatment data for a patient undergoing HDR-BT with a Results: The results showed a good agreement between the calculated dose in the homogeneous phantom and the real patient's treatment data, with a relative difference of less than 5% for both sources. However, when comparing the absorbed doses at critical points such as Point A right, Point A left, Point B right, Point B left, bladder International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurement (ICRU) point, and recto-vaginal ICRU point, the study revealed significant percentage differences (approximately 5.85% to 12.02%) between the homogeneous and heterogeneous setups for both Conclusions: The study concludes that
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.