ArticlePrecision radiation oncology2025
Measurements of Small Field Output Correction Factors on a RefleXion Treatment Machine.
Article in Precision radiation oncology, 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.
- Measurements of Small Field Output Correction Factors on a RefleXion Treatment Machine.Precision radiation oncology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The response of various detectors in small fields from a variety of treatment machines has been studied and is summarized in IAEA TRS-483. However, data for the novel RefleXion system remains largely unexplored. This study measured the output correction factors of multiple detectors in small fields for a clinical RefleXion unit. Methods: The RefleXion machine consists of a binary multi-leaf collimator and two pairs of Y-jaws with clinical openings of 1 and 2 cm. The reference dosimetry is applied to the 10 × 2 cm Results: In the fields of the 2 cm jaw, all 6 detectors showed similar responses to the film reference within around 0.5% except at the first field width (1.25 cm), where the Edge and Micro-Diamond exhibited over-response and the CC13 showed the volume effect of ion chambers. In the fields of the 1 cm jaw, the Edge and Micro-Diamond had responses close to the film and the same over-response at small field-widths. Significant deviations of the CC13 (∼4%) and the A14SL (∼2.5%) from the film were present over the whole range of field widths. Conclusions: The small field output correction factors of 6 kinds of detectors were determined for a RefleXion system, conforming to the formalism in TRS-483. All detectors except CC13 fulfil the 5% correction limit recommended by the TRS-483 for output factor measurement.
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.