ArticleRadiological physics and technology2022
Stopping-power ratio of mouthpiece materials for charged-particle therapy in head and neck cancer.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2022. 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.
- Error on the stopping power ratio of ERKODENT's mouthpiece for head and neck carbon ion radiotherapy treatment.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- A Custom Mouthpiece With Lip Bumper for Osteoradionecrosis Risk Reduction After Carbon-Ion Radiation Therapy for Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma of the Lip.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, the stopping-power ratios (SPRs) of mouthpiece materials were measured and the errors in the predicted SPRs based on conversion table values were further investigated. The SPRs of the five mouthpiece materials were predicted from their computed tomography (CT) numbers using a calibrated conversion table. Independently, the SPRs of the materials were measured from the Bragg peak shift of a carbon-ion beam passing through the materials. The errors in the SPRs of the materials were determined as the difference between the predicted and measured values. The measured SPRs (errors) of the Nipoflex 710™ and Bioplast™ ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymers (EVAs) were 0.997 (0.023) and 0.982 (0.007), respectively. The SPRs of the vinyl silicon impression material, light-curable resin, and bis-acrylic resin were 1.517 (0.134), 1.161 (0.068), and 1.26 (0.101), respectively. Among the five tested materials, the EVAs had the lowest SPR errors, indicating the highest human-tissue equivalency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.