ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2026
Will upright radiotherapy become a new standard? STAND: Perspectives and acceptability from the global radiotherapy community.
Article in Technical innovations & patient support 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study explored the acceptability and the perspectives of radiotherapy (RT) professionals about upright RT (upRT). The survey was developed, pre-tested and piloted with the support of the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO). It comprised up to 20 questions and 59 items, assessed using a 4-point Likert scale and organised into four sections: upright radiotherapy (upRT) provision within the respondent's centre, acceptability factors, patient groups and techniques that may benefit from upRT, and respondent demographics. Descriptive statistics summarised responses. Fisher's exact tests assessed the influence of demographic data on responses. From September to December 2025, 307 analysable responses were collected. Forty-four respondents (14%) had access to upRT. Among 263 without access to upRT, 191 (73%) were not familiar with upRT, 212 (81%) would be willing to use it, and 111 (42%) believe it could become a standard. Professionals working in Europe were less familiar with upRT (p = 0.0003), and respondents with fewer than 15 years of professional experience were less willing to use upRT (p = 0.03). Among 226 responses, the main perceived benefit was the improvement of psychological comfort (n = 175, 77%). Regarding the obstacles of implementation, 156/226 respondents (69%) reported the complexity of multimodality imaging. Training was a key challenge reported by 184/224 (82%) respondents once upRT would be implemented. Participants perceived that patients requiring a thoracic treatment (n = 129, 66%) or a proton/ion treatment (n = 98, 51%), would benefit the most from upRT according to 194 responses. UpRT remains limited in availability, is thought not to be routinely used soon, although RT professionals expressed willingness to use it. Further data are required to define the clinical role of upRT.
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.