ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
A multicentre audit of the geometric accuracy and water equivalence of 3D printed thermoplastic objects for use in radiotherapy.
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. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From local validation to global standardization of three-dimensional printing in radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- A multicentre audit of the geometric accuracy and water equivalence of 3D printed thermoplastic objects for use in radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Plastic materials are widely used as water substitutes in radiotherapy; however, the dosimetric properties of thermoplastic polymers used in 3D printing can vary. A multicentre audit was conducted to quantify variations in geometric accuracy, density and water-mimicking properties of 3D-printed objects. Materials and methods: Ten centres printed three polylactic acid (PLA) blocks at varying infills. Block dimensions, including protruding and recessed discs, were measured and the blocks weighed to determine geometric accuracy and mass density. Computed tomography (CT) scans were used to derive the printed infills and mass densities corresponding to water equivalence. Tissue phantom ratios (TPRs) were measured for 6 MV photon beams and compared to vendor-provided reference data for water. Results: A mean error of (-0.2 ± 0.3) mm (mean ± standard deviation, SD) was found for all printed dimensions and disc diameters. Measured CT numbers and mass densities varied by up to 200 Hounsfield units (HU) and 0.20 g/cm Conclusions: A multicentre audit was completed to develop understanding of geometric and dosimetric errors associated with 3D printing in radiotherapy.
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.