You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The collapsed cone algorithm for 192Ir dosimetry using phantom-size adaptive multiple-scatter point kernels
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Physics in Medicine & Biology, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1088/0031-9155/60/13/5313 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Åsa Carlsson Tedgren, Mathieu Plamondon, Luc Beaulieu |
| Abstract |
The aim of this work was to investigate how dose distributions calculated with the collapsed cone (CC) algorithm depend on the size of the water phantom used in deriving the point kernel for multiple scatter.A research version of the CC algorithm equipped with a set of selectable point kernels for multiple-scatter dose that had initially been derived in water phantoms of various dimensions was used. The new point kernels were generated using EGSnrc in spherical water phantoms of radii 5 cm, 7.5 cm, 10 cm, 15 cm, 20 cm, 30 cm and 50 cm. Dose distributions derived with CC in water phantoms of different dimensions and in a CT-based clinical breast geometry were compared to Monte Carlo (MC) simulations using the Geant4-based brachytherapy specific MC code Algebra.Agreement with MC within 1% was obtained when the dimensions of the phantom used to derive the multiple-scatter kernel were similar to those of the calculation phantom. Doses are overestimated at phantom edges when kernels are derived in larger phantoms and underestimated when derived in smaller phantoms (by around 2% to 7% depending on distance from source and phantom dimensions). CC agrees well with MC in the high dose region of a breast implant and is superior to TG43 in determining skin doses for all multiple-scatter point kernel sizes. Increased agreement between CC and MC is achieved when the point kernel is comparable to breast dimensions.The investigated approximation in multiple scatter dose depends on the choice of point kernel in relation to phantom size and yields a significant fraction of the total dose only at distances of several centimeters from a source/implant which correspond to volumes of low doses. The current implementation of the CC algorithm utilizes a point kernel derived in a comparatively large (radius 20 cm) water phantom. A fixed point kernel leads to predictable behaviour of the algorithm with the worst case being a source/implant located well within a patient/phantom for which low doses at phantom edges can be overestimated by 2-5 %. It would be possible to improve the situation by using a point kernel for multiple-scatter dose adapted to the patient/phantom dimensions at hand. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Greece | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 29 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 23% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Physics and Astronomy | 17 | 57% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 7% |
| Energy | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 January 2016.
All research outputs
#19,947,956
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Physics in Medicine & Biology
#4,341
of 5,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,821
of 278,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physics in Medicine & Biology
#35
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,902 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 278,356 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.