ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
Development and application of
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Ultra-high-dose-rate (UHDR) radiotherapy (RT) has emerged as a promising technique to widen the therapeutic window. However, clinical implementation is critically dependent on standardized dosimetry systems. This study reports on the integration of passive and active detectors for Materials and methods: Four detector systems were evaluated for patient treatments with UHDR at a modified C-arm linear accelerator (linac) (9 MeV, dose per pulse 1.08 Gy, average dose rate 216 Gy/s): two passive systems - optically stimulated luminescence detectors (OSLDs) and radiochromic films - and two active systems - a scintillator and a diamond detector. The detectors were positioned on a dedicated 3D-printed mount or the patient's skin to measure integral dose and time-resolved parameters. OSLDs were calibrated against a reference ion chamber and validated under varying conditions. Scintillator and diamond detectors recorded pulse-to-pulse and intra-pulse stability, respectively. Results: OSLDs provided reproducible dose reporting within ±5%, with precision improved through averaging multiple chips. The pulse-to-pulse stability measured with the scintillator was in agreement with the diamond detector measurements within ±1%. The diamond detector resolved intra-pulse stability and identified instabilities in case of poor beam tuning. Conclusions: The combined use of OSLDs, scintillator, diamond, and film detectors enabled robust and time-resolved recording of UHDR RT in a clinical trial setting. While resource-intensive, this approach ensured redundancy and precision, providing a feasible strategy for early clinical adoption.
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.