EURADOS intercomparison exercise on MC modelling for the in-vivo monitoring of AM-241 in skull phantoms (Part II and III).

Vrba, T.; Broggio, David; Caldeira, M.; Capello, Kevin; Fantínová, K.; Franck, Didier; Gómez-Ros, J.M.; Hunt, John; Kinase, Sakae; Leone, D.; Lombardo, Pasquale; Manohari, M.; Marzocchi, O.; Moraleda, M.; Nogueira, Pedro; Ośko, Jakub; Shutt, Arron; Suhl, Soheigh; Takahashi, Miwako; Teles, P.; Tremblay, Marilyn; Tymińska, K; López, M. A.; Tanner, R.J.

doi:10.1016/j.radphyschem.2015.04.009

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This task was for participants who had already calibrated their PBC system previously with another physical skull phantom or who are using Monte Carlo methods to calibrate their systems. Several of the participants also participated in the EURADOS Monte Carlo skull phantom intercomparison (Vrba et al, 2015;Vrba et al, 2014b). To be consistent, the same participant ID was used here, for those who participated in both intercomparisons.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

EURADOS 241Am skull measurement intercomparison

Nogueira

Rühm

López

et al. 2015

Radiation Measurements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2011 a measurement intercomparison was launched by EURADOS WG7, with the objective of providing the participants with the tools to calibrate their detection systems for detection of 241 Am in the skull bone, and evaluate the variability due to the used of the different calibration phantoms. Three skull phantoms were used in this intercomparison: the USTUR Case 0102 skull phantom, the BfS skull phantom and the CSR skull phantom. Very good agreement was found between the results of the twelve participating laboratories, with relative deviations of less than 15% for the BfS phantom and less than 17% for the USTUR phantom when measurement efficiency in defined positions was compared. However, the phantoms' measured absolute 241 Am activities showed discrepancies of up to a factor of 3.4. This is mainly due to the physical differences between the standard calibration phantoms used by the participants and those used in this intercomparison exercise.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

EURADOS 241Am skull measurement intercomparison

Nogueira

Rühm

López

et al. 2015

Radiation Measurements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The participants were asked to measure the counting efficiency using the three phantoms with a germanium detector, and the 241 Am in the three skulls using their own calibration procedures (Nogueira et al 2015). In a parallel exercise, a Monte Carlo simulation of the three skull phantoms was performed by 16 participants including simulation of the counting efficiency of one predefined germanium detector using the artificial voxelized skull phantom, the counting efficiency of a detector used in the participating laboratories for the three anthropomorphic skull phantoms, and a MC simulation of the whole detection process used in the participating laboratories with as many detectors as feasible (Vrba et al 2014(Vrba et al , 2015.…”

Section: Measurements and Monte Carlo Simulations For The Calibration...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The European radiation dosimetry group – Review of recent scientific achievements

Rühm

Ainsbury

Breustedt

et al. 2020

Radiation Physics and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Collaboration of Working Group 7 and Working Group 6 is traditionally close in terms of the application of MC methods and voxel phantoms for in-vivo calibration of body counters (Task Group 7.4), resulting in a number of intercomparison exercises and publications (Nogueira et al., 2015; Vrba et al., 2015; Breustedt et al., 2016), and on microdosimetric studies of internal emitters (Task Group 7.7), especially for nuclear medicine and radiotherapy applications. Task Group 7.8 is collaborating with Working Group 10 on the application of biodosimetric techniques in scenarios involving accidental internal exposures.…”

Section: Eurados Scientific Work Programmementioning

confidence: 99%

The work programme of EURADOS on internal and external dosimetry

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the early 1980s, the European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) has been maintaining a network of institutions interested in the dosimetry of ionising radiation. As of 2017, this network includes more than 70 institutions (research centres, dosimetry services, university institutes, etc.), and the EURADOS database lists more than 500 scientists who contribute to the EURADOS mission, which is to promote research and technical development in dosimetry and its implementation into practice, and to contribute to harmonisation of dosimetry in Europe and its conformance with international practices. The EURADOS working programme is organised into eight working groups dealing with environmental, computational, internal, and retrospective dosimetry; dosimetry in medical imaging; dosimetry in radiotherapy; dosimetry in high-energy radiation fields; and harmonisation of individual monitoring. Results are published as freely available EURADOS reports and in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Moreover, EURADOS organises winter schools and training courses on various aspects relevant for radiation dosimetry, and formulates the strategic research needs in dosimetry important for Europe. This paper gives an overview on the most important EURADOS activities. More details can be found at www.eurados.org .

show abstract

EURADOS intercomparison exercise on MC modelling for the in-vivo monitoring of AM-241 in skull phantoms (Part II and III).

Cited by 13 publications

References 9 publications

EURADOS 241Am skull measurement intercomparison

EURADOS 241Am skull measurement intercomparison

The European radiation dosimetry group – Review of recent scientific achievements

The work programme of EURADOS on internal and external dosimetry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About