ArticleInternational journal of particle therapy2025
Proton and Carbon Ion Beam Spot Size Measurement Using 5 Different Detector Types.
Article in International journal of particle therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Feasibility of proton daily QA prototype for pencil beam scanning carbon ion beam therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The spot size of scanned particle beams is of crucial importance for the correct dose delivery and, therefore, plays a significant role in the quality assurance (QA) of pencil beam scanning ion beam therapy. Materials and Methods: This study compares 5 detector types-radiochromic film, ionization chamber (IC) array, flat panel detector, multiwire chamber, and IC-for measuring the spot size of proton and carbon ion beams. Results: Variations of up to 30% were found between detectors, underscoring the impact of detector choice on QA outcomes. The multiwire chamber consistently measured the smallest spot sizes, attributed to its intrinsic calculation model, while the IC array yielded larger spot sizes due to volume-averaging effects. These discrepancies highlight the necessity of selecting detectors based on QA needs, such as measurement speed, spatial resolution, and data acquisition methods. Digital detectors offer advantages over film-based ones by automating data processing, reducing manual errors, and providing immediate results. Conclusion: The study concludes that, although a single Gaussian fit is generally sufficient for QA, more sophisticated models might be beneficial for special applications. These findings aim to guide detector selection for ion beam facilities, enhancing QA procedures.
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.