↓ Skip to main content

Management of organ motion in scanned ion beam therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
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.
Title
Management of organ motion in scanned ion beam therapy
Published in
Radiation Oncology, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13014-017-0911-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christoph Bert, Klaus Herfarth

Abstract

Scanned ion beam therapy has special demands for treatment of intra-fractionally moving tumors such as lesions in lung or liver. Interplay effects between beam and organ motion can in those settings lead to under-dosage of the target volume. Dedicated treatment techniques such as gating or abdominal compression are required. In addition 4D treatment planning should be used to determine strategies for patient specific treatment planning such as an increased beam focus or the use of internal target volumes incorporating range changes.Several work packages of the Clinical Research Units 214 and 214/2 funded by the German Research Council investigated the management of organ motion in scanned ion beam therapy. A focus was laid on 4D treatment planning using TRiP4D and the development of motion mitigation strategies including their quality assurance. This review focuses on the activity in the second funding period covering adaptive treatment planning strategies, 4D treatment plan optimization, and the application of motion management in pre-clinical research on radiation therapy of cardiac arrhythmias.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 30%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Master 4 12%
Other 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 9 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 21%
Engineering 4 12%
Computer Science 1 3%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,451,991
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,694
of 2,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,303
of 330,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#19
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,072 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 330,783 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.