↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

AAPM TG 158: Measurement and calculation of doses outside the treated volume from external-beam radiation therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Physics, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

4 tweeters
1 Facebook page


28 Dimensions

Readers on

112 Mendeley
AAPM TG 158: Measurement and calculation of doses outside the treated volume from external-beam radiation therapy
Published in
Medical Physics, August 2017
DOI 10.1002/mp.12462
Pubmed ID

Stephen F. Kry, Bryan Bednarz, Rebecca M. Howell, Larry Dauer, David Followill, Eric Klein, Harald Paganetti, Brian Wang, Cheng-Shie Wuu, X. George Xu


The introduction of advanced techniques and technology in radiotherapy has greatly improved our ability to deliver highly conformal tumor doses while minimizing the dose to adjacent organs at risk. Despite these tremendous improvements there remains a general concern about doses to normal tissues that are not the target of the radiation treatment; any "non-target" radiation should be minimized as it offers no therapeutic benefit. As patients live longer after treatment, there is increased opportunity for late effects including second cancers and cardiac toxicity to manifest. Complicating the management of these issues, there are unique challenges with measuring, calculating, reducing, and reporting non-target doses that many medical physicists may have limited experience with. Treatment planning systems become dramatically inaccurate outside the treatment field, necessitating a measurement or some other means of assessing the dose. However, measurements are challenging because outside the treatment field the radiation energy spectrum, dose rate, and general shape of the dose distribution (particularly the percent depth dose) are very different and often require special consideration. Neutron dosimetry is also particularly challenging, and common errors in methodology can easily manifest as errors of several orders of magnitude. Task Group 158 was therefore formed to provide guidance for physicists in terms of assessing and managing non-target doses. In particular the report: (1) highlights major concerns with non-target radiation, (2) provides a rough estimate of doses associated with different treatment approaches in clinical practice, (3) discusses the uses of dosimeters for measuring photon, electron, and neutron doses, (4) discusses the use of calculation techniques for dosimetric evaluations, (5) highlights techniques that may be considered for reducing non-target doses, (6) discusses dose reporting, and (7) makes recommendations for both clinical and research practice. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 112 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 19%
Other 18 16%
Student > Master 13 12%
Unspecified 11 10%
Other 24 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 59 53%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 21%
Unspecified 16 14%
Engineering 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 3 3%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 October 2017.
All research outputs
of 12,362,744 outputs
Outputs from Medical Physics
of 5,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 268,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Physics
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,362,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,413 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,349 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.