↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Accelerator beam data commissioning equipment and procedures: Report of the TG-106 of the Therapy Physics Committee of the AAPM

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Physics, August 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
4 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
191 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
397 Mendeley
Title
Accelerator beam data commissioning equipment and procedures: Report of the TG-106 of the Therapy Physics Committee of the AAPM
Published in
Medical Physics, August 2008
DOI 10.1118/1.2969070
Pubmed ID
Authors

Indra J. Das, Chee-Wai Cheng, Ronald J. Watts, Anders Ahnesjö, John Gibbons, X. Allen Li, Jessica Lowenstein, Raj K. Mitra, William E. Simon, Timothy C. Zhu

Abstract

For commissioning a linear accelerator for clinical use, medical physicists are faced with many challenges including the need for precision, a variety of testing methods, data validation, the lack of standards, and time constraints. Since commissioning beam data are treated as a reference and ultimately used by treatment planning systems, it is vitally important that the collected data are of the highest quality to avoid dosimetric and patient treatment errors that may subsequently lead to a poor radiation outcome. Beam data commissioning should be performed with appropriate knowledge and proper tools and should be independent of the person collecting the data. To achieve this goal, Task Group 106 (TG-106) of the Therapy Physics Committee of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine was formed to review the practical aspects as well as the physics of linear accelerator commissioning. The report provides guidelines and recommendations on the proper selection of phantoms and detectors, setting up of a phantom for data acquisition (both scanning and no-scanning data), procedures for acquiring specific photon and electron beam parameters and methods to reduce measurement errors (<1%), beam data processing and detector size convolution for accurate profiles. The TG-106 also provides a brief discussion on the emerging trend in Monte Carlo simulation techniques in photon and electron beam commissioning. The procedures described in this report should assist a qualified medical physicist in either measuring a complete set of beam data, or in verifying a subset of data before initial use or for periodic quality assurance measurements. By combining practical experience with theoretical discussion, this document sets a new standard for beam data commissioning.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 397 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 7 2%
Canada 4 1%
United States 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Japan 3 <1%
Greece 2 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Other 4 1%
Unknown 368 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 78 20%
Researcher 75 19%
Other 70 18%
Student > Master 60 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 26 7%
Other 88 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 226 57%
Medicine and Dentistry 88 22%
Unspecified 36 9%
Engineering 17 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 4%
Other 16 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 07 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,217,842
of 12,606,240 outputs
Outputs from Medical Physics
#302
of 5,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,098
of 274,094 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Physics
#5
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,606,240 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,475 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 274,094 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.