ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2025
Comparative characterisation of different types of Gafchromic films for radiotherapy use.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and evaluation of an in vivo dose-based monitoring system for electron FLASH radiation therapy.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Benchmarking a new radiochromic film type for photon and proton beam dosimetry.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Benchmarking Radiochromic EBT4 Film for Clinical Proton DosimetryRadiochromic Films for Proton Dosimetry.International journal of particle therapy · 2026Article
- On temporal evolution of the response of EBT4 radiochromic films.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Different types of Gafchromic films, for radiotherapy use, are recommended for different dose ranges. Ashland Specialty Ingredients has aimed to continuously develop its products to improve their practical application. Thus, EBT3 was replaced by EBT4, intended to provide better signal to noise ratio (SNR); while MD-V3 was introduced for use at higher dose ranges, in addition to EBT-XD. At present there are limited studies on MD-V3. This study aimed to investigate some relevant characteristics of EBT4 and MD-V3, compared with those of EBT3 and EBT-XD. The parameters investigated were dose response, optical density change with post-irradiation time, orientation effect, signal to noise ratio, polarisation, and lateral response artefact (LRA). EBT4 is similar to EBT3 however it provides better SNR and larger response change with post-irradiation time. EBT-XD and MD-V3 are recommended by the suppliers for high dose range, although the sensitivity curves show that EBT3 and EBT4 could also be used for relatively high dose ranges. All films have orientation effects, with EBT3 the worst. An important characteristic of MD-V3 is that the LRA remains similar, irrespective of delivered dose. These comparative characteristics are intended to be informative for clinical practice involving Gafchromic film use in high dose therapy applications. Recommendations from this study are to use EBT4 for dosimetry in lower-dose applications, provided that both calibration and clinical timings post-irradiation are kept similar, while MD-V3 is the preferred film for high-dose 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.