235 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28574211)
1. Comparison of the recommendations of the AAPM TG-51 and TG-51 addendum reference dosimetry protocols.
McCaw TJ; Hwang MS; Jang SY; Huq MS
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Jul; 18(4):140-143. PubMed ID: 28574211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of AAPM Addendum to TG-51, IAEA TRS-398, and JSMP 12: Calibration of photon beams in water.
Kinoshita N; Oguchi H; Nishimoto Y; Adachi T; Shioura H; Kimura H; Doi K
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Sep; 18(5):271-278. PubMed ID: 28771919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reference dosimetry in clinical high-energy photon beams: comparison of the AAPM TG-51 and AAPM TG-21 dosimetry protocols.
Saiful Huq M; Andreo P
Med Phys; 2001 Jan; 28(1):46-54. PubMed ID: 11213922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Reference dose determination in 60Co and high-energy radiotherapy photon beams by using Farmer-type cylindrical ionization chambers - an experimental investigation.
Swanpalmer J
Biomed Phys Eng Express; 2020 May; 6(4):045003. PubMed ID: 33444264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams.
Almond PR; Biggs PJ; Coursey BM; Hanson WF; Huq MS; Nath R; Rogers DW
Med Phys; 1999 Sep; 26(9):1847-70. PubMed ID: 10505874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reference dosimetry in clinical high-energy electron beams: comparison of the AAPM TG-51 and AAPM TG-21 dosimetry protocols.
Saiful Huq M; Song H; Andreo P; Houser CJ
Med Phys; 2001 Oct; 28(10):2077-87. PubMed ID: 11695769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical reference dosimetry: comparison between AAPM TG-21 and TG-51 protocols.
Ding GX; Cygler JE; Kwok CB
Med Phys; 2000 Jun; 27(6):1217-25. PubMed ID: 10902550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. [Measurement of peak correction factor of Farmer chamber for calibration of flattening filter free (FFF) clinical photon beams].
Kontra G; Major T; Polgár C
Magy Onkol; 2015 Jun; 59(2):119-23. PubMed ID: 26035159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Absorbed dose measurement of photon beam with Farmer-type ionization chambers in Japanese dosimetry protocols].
Fujisaki T; Hiraoka T; Osawa A; Nakajima M; Kuwabara A; Yokoyama K; Saitoh H; Tomaru T; Inada T
Igaku Butsuri; 2004; 24(1):13-20. PubMed ID: 15226645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Measurement of ionization chamber absorbed dose k(Q) factors in megavoltage photon beams.
McEwen MR
Med Phys; 2010 May; 37(5):2179-93. PubMed ID: 20527552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Quantification of the role of lead foil in flattening filter free beam reference dosimetry.
Gao S; Nelson C; Wang C; Kathriarachchi V; Choi M; Saxena R; Kendall R; Balter P
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2023 Apr; 24(4):e13960. PubMed ID: 36913192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A dosimetric evaluation of the IAEA-AAPM TRS483 code of practice for dosimetry of small static fields used in conventional linac beams and comparison with IAEA TRS-398, AAPM TG51, and TG51 Addendum protocols.
Huq MS; Hwang MS; Teo TP; Jang SY; Heron DE; Lalonde RJ
Med Phys; 2018 Jul; ():. PubMed ID: 30009526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Ion recombination and polarity corrections for small-volume ionization chambers in high-dose-rate, flattening-filter-free pulsed photon beams.
Hyun MA; Miller JR; Micka JA; DeWerd LA
Med Phys; 2017 Feb; 44(2):618-627. PubMed ID: 28001291
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Calculated absorbed-dose ratios, TG51/TG21, for most widely used cylindrical and parallel-plate ion chambers over a range of photon and electron energies.
Tailor RC; Hanson WF
Med Phys; 2002 Jul; 29(7):1464-72. PubMed ID: 12148727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effect of ICRU report 90 recommendations on Monte Carlo calculated k
Kawachi T; Saitoh H; Katayose T; Tohyama N; Miyasaka R; Cho SY; Iwase T; Hara R
Med Phys; 2019 Nov; 46(11):5185-5194. PubMed ID: 31386762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Addendum to the AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon beams.
McEwen M; DeWerd L; Ibbott G; Followill D; Rogers DW; Seltzer S; Seuntjens J
Med Phys; 2014 Apr; 41(4):041501. PubMed ID: 24694120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Technical Note: Correction for intra-chamber dose gradients in reference dosimetry of flattening-filter-free MV photon beams.
Ruggieri R; Naccarato S; Stavrev P; Stavreva N; Pasetto S; Salamone I; Alongi F
Med Phys; 2016 Aug; 43(8):4729. PubMed ID: 27487890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
