↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Guidelines by the AAPM and GEC-ESTRO on the use of innovative brachytherapy devices and applications: Report of Task Group 167

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Physics, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 5,503)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Guidelines by the AAPM and GEC-ESTRO on the use of innovative brachytherapy devices and applications: Report of Task Group 167
Published in
Medical Physics, June 2016
DOI 10.1118/1.4951734
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ravinder Nath, Mark J. Rivard, Larry A. DeWerd, William A. Dezarn, H. Thompson Heaton, Geoffrey S. Ibbott, Ali S. Meigooni, Zoubir Ouhib, Thomas W. Rusch, Frank-André Siebert, Jack L. M. Venselaar

Abstract

Although a multicenter, Phase III, prospective, randomized trial is the gold standard for evidence-based medicine, it is rarely used in the evaluation of innovative devices because of many practical and ethical reasons. It is usually sufficient to compare the dose distributions and dose rates for determining the equivalence of the innovative treatment modality to an existing one. Thus, quantitative evaluation of the dosimetric characteristics of innovative radiotherapy devices or applications is a critical part in which physicists should be actively involved. The physicist's role, along with physician colleagues, in this process is highlighted for innovative brachytherapy devices and applications and includes evaluation of (1) dosimetric considerations for clinical implementation (including calibrations, dose calculations, and radiobiological aspects) to comply with existing societal dosimetric prerequisites for sources in routine clinical use, (2) risks and benefits from a regulatory and safety perspective, and (3) resource assessment and preparedness. Further, it is suggested that any developed calibration methods be traceable to a primary standards dosimetry laboratory (PSDL) such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the U.S. or to other PSDLs located elsewhere such as in Europe. Clinical users should follow standards as approved by their country's regulatory agencies that approved such a brachytherapy device. Integration of this system into the medical source calibration infrastructure of secondary standard dosimetry laboratories such as the Accredited Dosimetry Calibration Laboratories in the U.S. is encouraged before a source is introduced into widespread routine clinical use. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine and the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) have developed guidelines for the safe and consistent application of brachytherapy using innovative devices and applications. The current report covers regulatory approvals, calibration, dose calculations, radiobiological issues, and overall safety concerns that should be addressed during the commissioning stage preceding clinical use. These guidelines are based on review of requirements of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Department of Transportation, International Electrotechnical Commission Medical Electrical Equipment Standard 60601, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, European Commission for CE Marking (Conformité Européenne), and institutional review boards and radiation safety committees.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 26%
Unspecified 7 18%
Other 7 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 18 46%
Unspecified 9 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Engineering 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 3 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#376,469
of 12,913,877 outputs
Outputs from Medical Physics
#16
of 5,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,290
of 264,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Physics
#7
of 295 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,913,877 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,503 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 264,205 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 295 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.