ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2024
The carbon footprint of external beam radiotherapy and its impact in health technology assessment.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Viewpoint: Optimising Cancer Treatment to Reduce Its Environmental Impact.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Green radiotherapy: aitro survey on sustainability awareness among Italian radiation therapists.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- High-Level Environmental Sustainability Guidelines for Large Accelerator Facilities.EPJ research infrastructures · 2026Article
- Contribution of hospitals and clinical services to global warming: a scoping systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Carbon footprint and staff demands of surgery and chemoradiation for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.BJU international · 2025Article
- Integrating Environmental Impact in Health Technology Assessment: An Exploratory Study.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- How Much Can Optimization of Hypofractionation Help to Reduce Carbon Equivalent Emissions? A Single-Center Modeling Study.Advances in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Comparison of Energy Consumption Between Single Energy O-Gantry and Dual Energy C-Arm Linear Accelerator.Advances in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Climate change and cancer care: impacts and implications for patients and healthcare professionals.Ecancermedicalscience · 2025Article
- Perceptions of the environmental impact of oncology care: A cross-sectional survey of French and Belgian healthcare professionals.The journal of climate change and healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The major drivers of carbon dioxide (CO Material and methods: We describe the carbon footprint of four typical centers. We explore direct EBRT associated factors such as the impact of fractionation and use of MRI-LINAC, as well as indirect factors (e.g. patient rides). Treatment strategy related CO Results: A typical EBRT treatment emits from 185 kgCO Conclusion: Carbon footprint of EBRT is not neglectable and could be mitigated. When safely feasible, hypofractionation is one of the main factors to decrease this impact. Taking into account CO
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.