ArticleJournal of medical physics
Radiological Characterization of Tissue Equivalent Materials: A Computational Approach.
Article in Journal of medical physics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Objective: Phantoms are crucial for accurate assessment of new techniques and for simulating clinical conditions safely while reducing the risk to patients. The study explores the efficacy of different tissue equivalent compositions to mimic actual human tissue for their applications in the medical field. Materials and Methods: The material composition nomenclatures as polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), solid water, SOT, ST, and resin have been employed by researchers for the study of tissue equivalency through different approaches. The computations to evaluate the useful radiological parameters, i.e., mass energy absorption coefficient, computed tomography number, gamma constant, dose rate, effective electron density for gamma rays and stopping power for charged particle ion beams have been done using established computer codes (XCOM [Photon Cross Sections Database] and SRIM/TRIM [Stopping and Range of Ions in Matter]) as well as through newly developed packages (Phy-X/photon shielding and dosimetry [PSD] and Proton, Alpha, Gamma, Electron and X-radiation interaction parameters [PAGEX]). Results and Discussion: It is concluded that solid water is the best tissue equivalent phantom material for gamma rays and electrons, while compositions, namely PMMA and ST, are found to be the best tissue equivalents for proton- and alpha particles respectively. The comparison of results obtained from recently developed computer codes (PAGEX and Phy-X/PSD) with established databases confirm their reliability for analysing the phantom materials through a user-friendly approach. Conclusions: Maximum relative difference of Phy-X/PSD versus XCOM results is found to be <1% for gamma rays (0.02-18 MeV), and for protons (0.05-10 MeV), this difference is ~ 2% among results of PAGEX and SRIM/TRIM. Results would be useful for gamma rays and ion beam-based therapies as well as for the development of new phantom compositions.
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.