189 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23819494)
1. Using a novel dose QA tool to quantify the impact of systematic errors otherwise undetected by conventional QA methods: clinical head and neck case studies.
Chan MF; Li J; Schupak K; Burman C
Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2014 Feb; 13(1):57-67. PubMed ID: 23819494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Per-beam, planar IMRT QA passing rates do not predict clinically relevant patient dose errors.
Nelms BE; Zhen H; Tomé WA
Med Phys; 2011 Feb; 38(2):1037-44. PubMed ID: 21452741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Pretreatment patient-specific IMRT quality assurance: a correlation study between gamma index and patient clinical dose volume histogram.
Stasi M; Bresciani S; Miranti A; Maggio A; Sapino V; Gabriele P
Med Phys; 2012 Dec; 39(12):7626-34. PubMed ID: 23231310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Moving from gamma passing rates to patient DVH-based QA metrics in pretreatment dose QA.
Zhen H; Nelms BE; Tome WA
Med Phys; 2011 Oct; 38(10):5477-89. PubMed ID: 21992366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Biological consequences of MLC calibration errors in IMRT delivery and QA.
Moiseenko V; Lapointe V; James K; Yin L; Liu M; Pawlicki T
Med Phys; 2012 Apr; 39(4):1917-24. PubMed ID: 22482613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A method to reconstruct and apply 3D primary fluence for treatment delivery verification.
Liu S; Mazur TR; Li H; Curcuru A; Green OL; Sun B; Mutic S; Yang D
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Jan; 18(1):128-138. PubMed ID: 28291913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact of the MLC leaf-tip model in a commercial TPS: Dose calculation limitations and IROC-H phantom failures.
Koger B; Price R; Wang D; Toomeh D; Geneser S; Ford E
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2020 Feb; 21(2):82-88. PubMed ID: 31961036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of DVH-based plan verification methods for VMAT: ArcCHECK-3DVH system and dynalog-based dose reconstruction.
Saito M; Kadoya N; Sato K; Ito K; Dobashi S; Takeda K; Onishi H; Jingu K
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Jul; 18(4):206-214. PubMed ID: 28649722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of one algorithm used to modify a planned DVH with data from actual dose delivery.
Ma T; Podgorsak MB; Kumaraswamy LK
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 Sep; 17(5):273-282. PubMed ID: 27685140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Modeling the dosimetry of organ-at-risk in head and neck IMRT planning: an intertechnique and interinstitutional study.
Lian J; Yuan L; Ge Y; Chera BS; Yoo DP; Chang S; Yin F; Wu QJ
Med Phys; 2013 Dec; 40(12):121704. PubMed ID: 24320490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comprehensive comparison study of three different planar IMRT QA techniques using MapCHECK 2.
Keeling VP; Ahmad S; Jin H
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 14(6):4398. PubMed ID: 24257283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluating IMRT and VMAT dose accuracy: practical examples of failure to detect systematic errors when applying a commonly used metric and action levels.
Nelms BE; Chan MF; Jarry G; Lemire M; Lowden J; Hampton C; Feygelman V
Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):111722. PubMed ID: 24320430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. IMRT QA: Selecting gamma criteria based on error detection sensitivity.
Steers JM; Fraass BA
Med Phys; 2016 Apr; 43(4):1982. PubMed ID: 27036593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Improvements in treatment planning calculations motivated by tightening IMRT QA tolerances.
Stambaugh C; Gagneur J; Uejo A; Clouser E; Ezzell G
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Jan; 20(1):250-257. PubMed ID: 30599085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of independent dose calculation followed by machine log file analysis against conventional measurement based IMRT QA.
Sun B; Rangaraj D; Boddu S; Goddu M; Yang D; Palaniswaamy G; Yaddanapudi S; Wooten O; Mutic S
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2012 Sep; 13(5):3837. PubMed ID: 22955649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Dependency of planned dose perturbation (PDP) on the spatial resolution of MapCHECK 2 detectors.
Keeling VP; Ahmad S; Algan O; Jin H
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2014 Jan; 15(1):4457. PubMed ID: 24423843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A clinically relevant IMRT QA workflow: Design and validation.
Stambaugh C; Ezzell G
Med Phys; 2018 Apr; 45(4):1391-1399. PubMed ID: 29481698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Attention-aware 3D U-Net convolutional neural network for knowledge-based planning 3D dose distribution prediction of head-and-neck cancer.
Osman AFI; Tamam NM
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2022 Jul; 23(7):e13630. PubMed ID: 35533234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of Delta
Tang D; Yang Z; Dai X; Cao Y
Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2020; 19():1533033820945816. PubMed ID: 32720589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Phantomless patient-specific TomoTherapy QA via delivery performance monitoring and a secondary Monte Carlo dose calculation.
Handsfield LL; Jones R; Wilson DD; Siebers JV; Read PW; Chen Q
Med Phys; 2014 Oct; 41(10):101703. PubMed ID: 25281942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
