These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

715 related items for PubMed ID: 11720359

  • 1. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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 07; 47(17):3033-53. PubMed ID: 12361209
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. 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 07; 28(1):46-54. PubMed ID: 11213922
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Comparison of high-energy photon and electron dosimetry for various dosimetry protocols.
    Araki F, Kubo HD.
    Med Phys; 2002 May 07; 29(5):857-68. PubMed ID: 12033582
    [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 07; 48(9):1091-107. PubMed ID: 12765324
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. 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 07; 47(3):421-40. PubMed ID: 11848121
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Comparing calibration methods of electron beams using plane-parallel chambers with absorbed-dose to water based protocols.
    Stewart KJ, Seuntjens JP.
    Med Phys; 2002 Mar 07; 29(3):284-9. PubMed ID: 11929010
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. 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 06; 6(4):045003. PubMed ID: 33444264
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. 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 06; 29(7):1464-72. PubMed ID: 12148727
    [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 Jul 06; 24(1):13-20. PubMed ID: 15226645
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. 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 06; 26(9):1847-70. PubMed ID: 10505874
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Wall correction factors for calibration of plane-parallel ionization chambers with high-energy photon beams.
    Araki F, Ikeda R, Shirakawa Y, Shimonobou T, Moribe N, Takada T, Takahashi M, Oura H, Matoba M.
    Phys Med Biol; 2000 Sep 06; 45(9):2509-17. PubMed ID: 11008952
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. [Determination of absorbed dose to water for high energy photon and electron beams--comparison of different dosimetry protocols].
    Zakaria GA, Schütte W.
    Z Med Phys; 2003 Sep 06; 13(4):281-9. PubMed ID: 14732959
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Comparison and uncertainty evaluation of different calibration protocols and ionization chambers for low-energy surface brachytherapy dosimetry.
    Candela-Juan C, Vijande J, García-Martínez T, Niatsetski Y, Nauta G, Schuurman J, Ouhib Z, Ballester F, Perez-Calatayud J.
    Med Phys; 2015 Aug 06; 42(8):4954-64. PubMed ID: 26233221
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Ionization chamber dosimetry of proton beams using cylindrical and plane parallel chambers. Nw versus Nk ion chamber calibrations.
    Medin J, Andreo P, Grusell E, Mattsson O, Montelius A, Roos M.
    Phys Med Biol; 1995 Jul 06; 40(7):1161-76. PubMed ID: 7568375
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Clinical reference dosimetry: comparison between AAPM TG-21 and TG-51 protocols.
    Ding GX, Cygler JE, Kwok CB.
    Med Phys; 2000 Jun 06; 27(6):1217-25. PubMed ID: 10902550
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Performance analysis and determination of the p(wall) correction factor for 60Co gamma-ray beams for Wellhöfer Roos-type plane-parallel chambers.
    Palm A, Czap L, Andreo P, Mattsson O.
    Phys Med Biol; 2002 Feb 21; 47(4):631-40. PubMed ID: 11900195
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 36.