↓ Skip to main content

A randomized study of the effect of patient positioning on setup reproducibility and dose distribution to organs at risk in radiotherapy of rectal cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
A randomized study of the effect of patient positioning on setup reproducibility and dose distribution to organs at risk in radiotherapy of rectal cancer patients
Published in
Radiation Oncology, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13014-015-0524-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Trude C. Frøseth, Trond Strickert, Kjersti S. Solli, Øyvind Salvesen, Gunilla Frykholm, Randi J. Reidunsdatter

Abstract

The patient positioning in pelvic radiotherapy (RT) should be decided based on both reproducibility and on which position that yields the lowest radiation dose to the organs at risk (OAR), and thereby less side effects to patients. The present randomized study aimed to evaluate the influence of patient positioning on setup reproducibility and dose distribution to OAR in rectal cancer patients. Ninety-one patients were randomized into receiving RT in either supine or prone position. The recruitment period was from 2005 to 2008. Position deviations were derived from electronic portal image registrations, and setup errors were defined as deviations between the expected and the actual position of bony landmarks. Setup deviations were expressed into three table shift values (∆x, ∆y, ∆z) from which the deviation vector [Formula: see text] were calculated. The estimated lengths of [Formula: see text] defined the main outcome and were compared between prone and supine positions using linear mixed model statistics. The mean volume of each 5 Gy increments between 5 and 45 Gy was calculated for the small bowel and the total bowel, and the dose volumes were compared between prone and supine position. Data from 83 patients was evaluable. The mean [Formula: see text] was 5.8 mm in supine position and 7.1 mm in prone position (p = 0.024), hence the reproducibility was significantly superior in supine position. However, the difference was marginal and may have borderline clinical importance. The irradiated volumes of the small bowel and the total bowel were largest in the supine position for all dose levels, but none of those were significantly different. The patient positioning in RT of rectal cancer patients may therefore be decided based on other factors such as the most comfortable position for the patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 29%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 May 2020.
All research outputs
#13,958,483
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#749
of 2,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,519
of 284,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#20
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,057 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 284,522 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 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.