ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2026
New standoff-factor formula for orthovoltage radiotherapy treatments.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Orthovoltage x-rays are useful for the treatment of some superficial cancers and benign conditions. An orthovoltage machine has numerous different applicators (open and closed ended) and energies that require measurements for all different applicator-energy combinations in addition to patient-specific Standoff Factor (SF) measurements, which is arduous and time-consuming. This study aimed to introduce a simple, accurate, and practical method to calculate SF. This factor is usually calculated based on the inverse square law (ISL), which is not an accurate approximation for closed-ended applicators. In this work, we introduced a simple, accurate, and practical method to calculate SF that is valid for both open-ended and closed-ended applicators. Xstrahl 300 therapy unit was used with two sets of Open-ended and Closed-ended applicators with energies up to 300 kVp. The proposed SF empirical formula and ISL were evaluated against the measurements. For open-ended applicators, the maximum Percentage Differences (PD) in calculated SF using the suggested formula and ISL were 0.84% and 1.97% relative to the measurement, respectively. For closed-ended applicators, the maximum PD was 2.53% and -8.12% using the suggested formula and ISL relative to the measurement, respectively. The results demonstrated satisfactory accuracy compared to the measured standoff factor values and superior accuracy when compared to the commonly used ISL method, particularly for closed-ended applicators. The study concluded that SF calculated using the proposed formula was in agreement with measured SF at clinically relevant standoff distances for all energies and applicators combinations. Thus, we recommend using this proposed formula for SF calculations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41222891What 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.