ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
3D gel dosimeter assessment for end-to-end geometric accuracy determination of the online adaptive workflow on the 1.5 T MR-linac.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality assurance of online adaptive radiotherapy workflows using film dosimetry in a 3D printed thorax anthropomorphic phantom.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Development and demonstration of end-to-end testing for intra-fraction motion-managed workflows.Medical physics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: During an end-to-end (E2E) test on the online workflow of the MR-linac, the performance of the treatment starting from the acquisition of pre-treatment MRI scans and ending with dose delivery is quantified. In such a test, the geometrical accuracy of the entire workflow is assessed. Ideally, the 3D geometrical accuracy of dose delivery on an MR-linac should be assessed using dosimeters that provide 3D dose distributions. Gel dosimeters, for instance, have proven to be valuable tools for evaluating 3D dose distributions on an MR-linac. In this study, we investigated the use of 3D gel dosimeters for the assessment of the 3D geometrical accuracy and reproducibility of the adaptive procedure on an MR-linac in an E2E verification. Materials and methods: All measurements were performed on a clinical Unity MR-linac using 3D gel dosimeters in an anthropomorphic head phantom. Film measurements were performed as a reference dosimeter. An online adapt-to-shape procedure was performed for each measurement. Results: The geometric accuracy and reproducibility of the gel dosimeter measurements were high, and similar to all in-plane film measurements. The largest shift found was 0.3 mm for the gel dosimeter, and 0.6 mm for the in-plane film measurements. The 3D displacement vectors of the gel dosimeter showed similar uncertainties as the in-plane film 2D displacement vectors. Conclusions: Gel dosimeters can be used for the assessment of the 3D end-to-end geometric accuracy of an MR-linac.
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.