113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18488961)
1. Comparison of linear accelerator photon outputs from the IAEA TRS-398 and TRS-277 codes of practice.
Fourie OL
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2008 Mar; 31(1):24-31. PubMed ID: 18488961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Protocols for the dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams: a comparison of the IAEA TRS-398 and previous international codes of practice. International Atomic Energy Agency.
Andreo P; Huq MS; Westermark M; Song H; Tilikidis A; DeWerd L; Shortt K
Phys Med Biol; 2002 Sep; 47(17):3033-53. PubMed ID: 12361209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The calibration of a Scanditronix-Wellhöfer thimble chamber for photon dosimetry using the IAEA TRS 277 code of practice.
Fourie OL
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2004 Mar; 27(1):33-6. PubMed ID: 15156707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Shift in absorbed dose for megavoltage photons when changing to TRS-398 in Australia.
Butler DJ; Palmans H; Webb DV; ;
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2005 Sep; 28(3):159-64. PubMed ID: 16250469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Consistency in reference radiotherapy dosimetry: resolution of an apparent conundrum when (60)Co is the reference quality for charged-particle and photon beams.
Andreo P; Wulff J; Burns DT; Palmans H
Phys Med Biol; 2013 Oct; 58(19):6593-621. PubMed ID: 24018471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A dosimetry study comparing NCS report-5, IAEA TRS-381, AAPM TG-51 and IAEA TRS-398 in three clinical electron beam energies.
Palmans H; Nafaa L; de Patoul N; Denis JM; Tomsej M; Vynckier S
Phys Med Biol; 2003 May; 48(9):1091-107. PubMed ID: 12765324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of high-energy photon and electron dosimetry for various dosimetry protocols.
Araki F; Kubo HD
Med Phys; 2002 May; 29(5):857-68. PubMed ID: 12033582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Dosimetry of small static fields used in external photon beam radiotherapy: Summary of TRS-483, the IAEA-AAPM international Code of Practice for reference and relative dose determination.
Palmans H; Andreo P; Huq MS; Seuntjens J; Christaki KE; Meghzifene A
Med Phys; 2018 Nov; 45(11):e1123-e1145. PubMed ID: 30247757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of the IAEA TRS-398 and AAPM TG-51 absorbed dose to water protocols in the dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams.
Huq MS; Andreo P; Song H
Phys Med Biol; 2001 Nov; 46(11):2985-3006. PubMed ID: 11720359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Direct megavoltage photon calibration service in Australia.
Butler DJ; Ramanathan G; Oliver C; Cole A; Lye J; Harty PD; Wright T; Webb DV; Followill DS
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2014 Dec; 37(4):753-61. PubMed ID: 25146559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Absorbed dose to water based dosimetry versus air kerma based dosimetry for high-energy photon beams: an experimental study.
Palmans H; Nafaa L; De JJ; Gillis S; Hoornaert MT; Martens C; Piessens M; Thierens H; Van der Plaetsen A; Vynckier S
Phys Med Biol; 2002 Feb; 47(3):421-40. PubMed ID: 11848121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison between the TRS-398 code of practice and the TG-51 dosimetry protocol for flattening filter free beams.
Lye JE; Butler DJ; Oliver CP; Alves A; Lehmann J; Gibbons FP; Williams IM
Phys Med Biol; 2016 Jul; 61(14):N362-72. PubMed ID: 27366933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A calibration procedure for beam monitors in a scanned beam of heavy charged particles.
Jäkel O; Hartmann GH; Karger CP; Heeg P; Vatnitsky S
Med Phys; 2004 May; 31(5):1009-13. PubMed ID: 15191285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Experimental validation of beam quality correction factors for proton beams.
Gomà C; Hofstetter-Boillat B; Safai S; Vörös S
Phys Med Biol; 2015 Apr; 60(8):3207-16. PubMed ID: 25813370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Study of the influence of phantom material and size on the calibration of ionization chambers in terms of absorbed dose to water.
Arib M; Medjadj T; Boudouma Y
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 7(3):55-64. PubMed ID: 17533342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Experimental determination of beam quality factors, kQ, for two types of Farmer chamber in a 10 MV photon and a 175 MeV proton beam.
Medin J; Ross CK; Klassen NV; Palmans H; Grusell E; Grindborg JE
Phys Med Biol; 2006 Mar; 51(6):1503-21. PubMed ID: 16510959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Dosimetry study comparing NCS report-2 versus IAEA report TRS-398 for high energy photon beams.
Attalla EM; Khaled NE; Abou-Elenein HS; Elsayed AA
Gulf J Oncolog; 2008 Jan; (3):25-31. PubMed ID: 20084794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of the NMIJ and the ARPANSA standards for absorbed dose to water in high-energy photon beams.
Shimizu M; Morishita Y; Kato M; Tanaka T; Kurosawa T; Takata N; Saito N; Ramanathan G; Harty PD; Oliver C; Wright T; Butler DJ
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Apr; 164(3):181-6. PubMed ID: 25209996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of dosimetry recommendations for clinical proton beams.
Medin J; Andreo P; Vynckier S
Phys Med Biol; 2000 Nov; 45(11):3195-211. PubMed ID: 11098898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Experimental determination of beam quality conversion factors k(Q) in clinical photon beams using ferrous sulphate (Fricke) dosimetry.
Palm A; Mattsson O
Med Phys; 2002 Dec; 29(12):2756-62. PubMed ID: 12512708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
