ArticleJournal of medical signals and sensors2024
Evaluation and Comparison of the Dose Received by the Mandible, Maxilla, and Teeth in Two Methods of Three-dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy and Helical Tomotherapy.
Article in Journal of medical signals and sensors, 2024. 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.
- Complementary roles of GPU-accelerated Monte Carlo and ArcCHECK in TomoTherapy quality assurance.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Using three-dimensional conformal radiation treatment (3D-CRT) and helical tomotherapy (HT), this study examines and contrasts the dosage received by the mandible, maxilla, and teeth. Methods: Sixteen patients with head-and-neck cancer (H and NC) were the subject of treatment planning at the Seyyed Al-Shohada Hospital in Isfahan, Iran. This study examined target coverage quality, exposure of healthy tissue, and radiation delivery effectiveness. Results: In terms of a number of measures, including D Conclusion: The findings of the comparison of the two treatment approaches revealed that the HT method was more than 50% more effective than the 3D-CRT method in sustaining organs at risk (OARs) and the target volume dose. In general, dosimetric coverage, homogeneity, conformity indices, and the absence of cold and hot patches showed that HT produced targets with greater accuracy than 3D-CRT. In addition, HT outperformed 3D-CRT in protecting important structures (OARs). HT as a result has the potential to be a more effective method of treatment for those with H and NC and involvement of regional lymph nodes.
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.