ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Dose rate correction of a diode array for universal wedge field dosimetric verification.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. 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.
- Dose rate correction of a diode array for universal wedge field dosimetric verification.Journal of applied clinical 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo study the performance of MapCHECK 3 (MC3) in measuring universal wedge fields and propose a dose rate correction strategy to improve MC3 measurement accuracy. MATERIALS AND
methodsUniversal wedge fields with different wedge angles and field sizes were measured at different depths using MC3. Considering the more prominent dose rate dependence of type 4 diodes equipped by MC3, a program was developed to automatically correct the measurements based on the instantaneous dose rate (IDR) correction curve. Central axis (CAX) doses and off-axis doses along the wedge direction, with and without the correction, were compared with those measured by an ion chamber under the same condition. Measurements using MC3 with and without correction were also compared with the planned doses calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS).
resultsIf MC3 was used for universal wedge field measurement with the dose calibration factor (DCF) derived from a reference open field, an error of up to -2.4% would be introduced into the CAX dose. Other factors (field size and measurement depth) would also affect the accuracy of measurement when they differed from the absolute dose calibration and the maximum error was up to -2.9%. While greater errors were observed in the off-axis doses at the heel side of the wedge compared to the toe side due to the greater effective thickness of the wedge inserted into the beam. After dose rate correction, the deviations in the CAX dose were reduced to within ± 1.5%. The average gamma pass rate was also improved to over 99.5%.
conclusionBecause of the more prominent dose rate dependence of type 4 diodes, MC3 is not suitable for universal wedge field measurement using the methodology for open field measurement. The correction strategy proposed in this study is convenient and can improve the accuracy of universal wedge field measurement using MC3.
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.