ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Checklist and quality assurance tools for integration of two radiation oncology information systems (ROISs).
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2026. 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.
- Checklist and quality assurance tools for integration of two radiation oncology information systems (ROISs).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
backgroundMerging two radiation oncology information systems (ROISs) is often necessary due to system changes or hospital integrations. ROIS integration is a high-risk procedure, that requires clear procedural guidelines and comprehensive QA methods to ensure safe practice. PURPOSE: This paper presents checklists, procedures, and challenges associated with integrating a ROIS into a centralized system, providing procedural guidelines and QA methods. It also shares our experience of merging with one ROIS into another.
methodThe integration process comprised five major components: machine information; under-treatment patients' information (treatment plans, history, images, and electronic medical records [EMR]); user-generated workflows; ROIS user information; and beam-related information, if any (e.g., beam calibration). The procedures were divided into three parts: site survey and preparation-phase activities, QA during integration, and QA after integration. Software tools were developed to compare data before and after the merger. Integration of legacy data was not considered in this process.
resultsWe successfully integrated a standalone practice site into a main ROIS, which may serve multiple sites, over the course of a single weekend using the developed tools and checklists. By the following Monday, after 45-person hours of integration work by therapists, dosimetrists and physicists, the newly integrated practice site was able to seamlessly use the centralized ROIS to continue radiation treatment for its patients already under care. The entire procedure was completed without any downtime at any site.
conclusionWe have developed and successfully tested a structured set of checklists, procedures, and tools for the seamless integration of a practice site into an existing ROIS. This approach provides the radiation oncology community with a framework for achieving safe and efficient practice integration.
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.