ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
The impact of plan complexity on calculation and measurement-based pre-treatment verifications for sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dose calculation errors for volumetric modulated arc therapy plans of various complexity.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
- The smoothing factor in breast intensity-modulated radiotherapy: dosimetric impact and a predictive model of plan acceptability.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2026Article
- A pathway away from measurement-based patient-specific QA: A review of contemporary quality assurance for external-beam radiotherapy sub-systems.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Review
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 and purpose: In sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy, increased plan modulation often leads to increased plan complexities and dose uncertainties. Dose calculation and/or measurement checks are usually adopted for pre-treatment verification. This study aims to evaluate the relationship among plan complexities, calculated doses and measured doses. Materials and methods: A total of 53 plan complexity metrics (PCMs) were selected, emphasizing small field characteristics and leaf speed/acceleration. Doses were retrieved from two beam-matched treatment devices. The intended dose was computed employing the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm and validated through Monte Carlo (MC) and Collapsed Cone Convolution (CCC) algorithms. To measure the delivered dose, 3D diode arrays of various geometries, encompassing helical, cross, and oblique cross shapes, were utilized. Their interrelation was assessed via Spearman correlation analysis and principal component linear regression (PCR). Results: The correlation coefficients between calculation-based (CQA) and measurement-based verification quality assurance (MQA) were below 0.53. Most PCMs showed higher correlation Conclusions: CQA and MQA demonstrated a weak correlation. Compared to MQA, CQA exhibited a stronger correlation with PCMs. Certain PCMs related to MLC movement effectively indicated variations in both quality assurances.
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.