ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
A multi-institutional EPID-based 3D dose reconstruction model in a virtual phantom for standardized patient QA, benchmarking and auditing for stereotactic radiosurgery.
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
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background and Purpose: For single-isocentre multi-target (SIMT) stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), benchmarking, auditing and inter-institutional standardisation of dose verification remain challenging as they require specialized equipment and expertise. This work aims to develop and validate an electronic portal imaging device (EPID)-based technique to determine 3D dose in a virtual spherical phantom which is applicable across institutions for SIMT SRS dose verification. Materials and Methods: Small-field output factors from 11 international centres were measured in-water for the TrueBeam linear accelerator, including jaw-defined and high-definition multi-leaf collimator (MLC) fields from 0.5 × 0.5 to 20 × 20 cm Results: Output factors estimated from EPID-to-dose models were within 1.8% (jaw-derived) and 1.0% (MLC-derived) of measured factors at 10 cm depth. For SIMT SRS plans, target dose differences were -0.3 ± 2.4% (mean ± standard deviation) and gamma pass rates were 99.6 ± 1.7% (5%/1.5 mm) for the jaw-derived model compared to film. For the MLC-derived model, -0.2 ± 2.1% dose differences and 99.7 ± 1.2% pass rates (5%/1.5 mm) were achieved. Conclusions: The EPID-based three-dimensional dose reconstruction method was modelled using multi-institutional data and validated for static and SIMT SRS deliveries. This method requires no specialised equipment and can be applied across institutions for benchmarking, auditing and standardised patient-specific quality assurance for SRS.
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.