The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Review of clinical brachytherapy uncertainties: Analysis guidelines of GEC-ESTRO and the AAPM
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A substantial reduction of uncertainties in clinical brachytherapy should result in improved outcome in terms of increased local control and reduced side effects. Types of uncertainties have to be identified, grouped, and quantified. METHODS: A detailed literature review was performed to identify uncertainty components and their relative importance to the combined overall uncertainty. RESULTS: Very few components (e.g., source strength and afterloader timer) are independent of clinical disease site and location of administered dose. While the influence of medium on dose calculation can be substantial for low energy sources or non-deeply seated implants, the influence of medium is of minor importance for high-energy sources in the pelvic region. The level of uncertainties due to target, organ, applicator, and/or source movement in relation to the geometry assumed for treatment planning is highly dependent on fractionation and the level of image guided adaptive treatment. Most studies to date report the results in a manner that allows no direct reproduction and further comparison with other studies. Often, no distinction is made between variations, uncertainties, and errors or mistakes. The literature review facilitated the drafting of recommendations for uniform uncertainty reporting in clinical BT, which are also provided. The recommended comprehensive uncertainty investigations are key to obtain a general impression of uncertainties, and may help to identify elements of the brachytherapy treatment process that need improvement in terms of diminishing their dosimetric uncertainties. It is recommended to present data on the analyzed parameters (distance shifts, volume changes, source or applicator position, etc.), and also their influence on absorbed dose for clinically-relevant dose parameters (e.g., target parameters such as D90 or OAR doses). Publications on brachytherapy should include a statement of total dose uncertainty for the entire treatment course, taking into account the fractionation schedule and level of image guidance for adaptation. CONCLUSIONS: This report on brachytherapy clinical uncertainties represents a working project developed by the Brachytherapy Physics Quality Assurances System (BRAPHYQS) subcommittee to the Physics Committee within GEC-ESTRO. Further, this report has been reviewed and approved by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
GUIDE TO THE EXPRESSION OF UNCERTAINTY IN MEASUREMENT
Standard, S. (2006) · Cited by 6,460
Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results
Taylor, B. N. (1994) · National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Technical Note 1297 · doi:10.6028/nist.tn.1297 · Cited by 2,833
Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results
Taylor, B. N., & Kuyatt, C. E. (2018) · doi:10.6028/nist.tn.1297-1993 · Cited by 2,582
Nath, R., Anderson, L. L., Luxton, G., Weaver, K. A., Williamson, J. F., & Meigooni, A. S. (1995) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.597458 · Cited by 1,951
Update of AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report: A revised AAPM protocol for brachytherapy dose calculations
Rivard, M. J., Coursey, B. M., DeWerd, L. A., Hanson, W. F., Huq, M. S., Ibbott, G. S., Mitch, M. G., Nath, R., & Williamson, J. F. (2004) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.1646040 · Cited by 1,751
Self-citationJoiner, M. C., & van der Kogel, A. (2009) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/b15450 · Cited by 1,068
American Association of Physicists in Medicine
(1973) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/106.3.717b · Cited by 732
Pérez‐Calatayud, J., Ballester, F., Das, R. K., DeWerd, L. A., Ibbott, G. S., Meigooni, A. S., Ouhib, Z., Rivard, M. J., Sloboda, R. S., & Williamson, J. F. (2012) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.3703892 · Cited by 301
Self-citationInternational Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements
(2014) · Journal of the ICRU · doi:10.1093/jicru_ndw040 · Cited by 260
DeWerd, L. A., Ibbott, G. S., Meigooni, A. S., Mitch, M. G., Rivard, M. J., Stump, K. E., Thomadsen, B. R., & Venselaar, J. L. M. (2011) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.3533720 · Cited by 247
Self-citation
Cited by
Nicolae, A., Morton, G., Chung, H., Loblaw, A., Jain, S., Mitchell, D., Lu, L., Helou, J., Al-Hanaqta, M., Heath, E., et al. (2017) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.11.036 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Kirisits, C., Rivard, M. J., Baltas, D., Ballester, F., De Brabandere, M., van der Laarse, R., Niatsetski, Y., Papagiannis, P., Hellebust, T. P., Perez-Calatayud, J., Tanderup, K., Venselaar, J. L. M., & Siebert, F.-A.
- Venue
- Radiotherapy and Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 110
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 199-212
- ISSN
- 0167-8140 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1969290748
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 22
- FWCI
- 20.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Review of clinical brachytherapy uncertainties: Analysis guidelines of GEC-ESTRO and the AAPM. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.radonc.2013.11.002
- The paper
- Kirisits, C., Rivard, M. J., Baltas, D., Ballester, F., De Brabandere, M., van der Laarse, R., Niatsetski, Y., Papagiannis, P., Hellebust, T. P., Perez-Calatayud, J., Tanderup, K., Venselaar, J. L. M., & Siebert, F.-A. (2014). Review of clinical brachytherapy uncertainties: Analysis guidelines of GEC-ESTRO and the AAPM. Radiotherapy and Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2013.11.002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.