Monte Carlo calculation of quality correction factors based on air kerma and absorbed dose to water in medium energy x-ray beams
Physics in Medicine and Biology, ISSN: 1361-6560, Vol: 65, Issue: 24, Page: 245042
2020
- 4Citations
- 15Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Clinical dosimetry is typically performed using ion chambers calibrated in terms of absorbed dose to water. As primary measurement standards for this quantity for low and medium energy x-rays are available only since a few years, most dosimetry protocols for this photon energy range are still based on air kerma calibration. For that reason, data for beam quality correction factors Q,Q_0, necessary for the application of dose to water based protocols, are scarce in literature. Currently the international IAEA TRS-398 Code of Practice is under revision and new Q,Q_0 factors for a large number of ion chambers will be introduced in the update of this protocol. Several international groups provided the IAEA with experimental and Monte Carlo based data for this revision. Within the European Community the EURAMET 16NRM03 RTNORM project was initiated for that purpose. In the present study, Monte Carlo based results for the beam quality correction factors in medium energy x-ray beams for six ion chambers applying different Monte Carlo codes are presented. Additionally, the perturbation factor p Q, necessary for the calculation of dose to water from an air kerma calibration coefficient, was determined. The beam quality correction factor Q,Q_0for the chambers varied in the investigated energy range by about 4%-5%, and for five out of six chambers the data could be fitted by a simple logarithmic function, if the half-value-layer was used as the beam quality specifier. Corresponding data using different Monte Carlo codes for the same ion chamber agreed within 0.5%. For the perturbation factor p Q , the data did not obey a comparable simple relationship with the beam quality specifier. The variation of p Q for all ion chambers was in the range of 3%-4%. Compared to recently published data, our p Q data is around 1% larger, although the same Monte Carlo code has been used. Compared to the latest experimental data, there are even deviations in the range of 2%.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85098545663&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/abc5c9; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33120372; https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6560/abc5c9; https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/abc5c9; https://validate.perfdrive.com/9730847aceed30627ebd520e46ee70b2/?ssa=a560470c-84fe-4466-81ad-f3997c8b8575&ssb=07959218116&ssc=https%3A%2F%2Fiopscience.iop.org%2Farticle%2F10.1088%2F1361-6560%2Fabc5c9&ssi=6a93ece3-cnvj-4f86-a80a-638207b90230&ssk=botmanager_support@radware.com&ssm=080026225187144717190627388860642542&ssn=5a01dcf6d7ed08e336cc612fe9dc435602da0900c3c4-8990-4f21-ac233e&sso=de464f8c-bc564dd29dea0fc7716ba6af9ae812c4b64dc34f7d992aa5&ssp=21435452951726540761172708292434217&ssq=49972872633909842253029239572611396913908&ssr=NTIuMy4yMTcuMjU0&sst=com.plumanalytics&ssu=&ssv=&ssw=&ssx=eyJyZCI6ImlvcC5vcmciLCJ1em14IjoiN2Y5MDAwMGMxZDc2YmItMzk2MS00N2VjLTlkZGItNjdmYTVhZTY2ODdlNy0xNzI2NTI5MjM5NDUzNDk3MDk5NjI1LTA3ZDhmYjI5YWZjNjRjMmY3MTg4MjIiLCJfX3V6bWYiOiI3ZjYwMDBkNzYzNGE3Ni05ZTRkLTRjMmMtYjJhMC1mYzAzNGMyZjE1MjkxNzI2NTI5MjM5NDUzNDk3MDk5NjI1LTNmNzBlNjE3NmE0ODU0ZWQ3MTg5MDAifQ==
IOP Publishing
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know