Medical physics publishing in a changing research environment: the Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine 40th anniversary editorial

New name: Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine

“…It is important to note that, although the new name will take some time to flow through to indexing databases and journal metrics, the journal itself is not new. It has been established for some 43 years as an scientific journal (Volume 1) and 60 years as an entity, in that its beginnings go back to December 1959 when it was first produced as the Australasian Newsletter of Medical Physics in 1959 [3][4][5].…”

Big shoes to fill

“…It is with some nervousness that I take on the role of Editor in Chief of this journal. As I look at how previous editors have advanced the journal from a local scientific newsletter [1][2][3] to fully fledged journal [4,5] and then to the current status of a truly international journal which receives over 90% of manuscripts from countries other than Australia and New Zealand, I understand that there are very big shoes to fill.…”

“…Martin's tenure saw the change to publishing with the Springer-Nature publishing house which now handles such tasks, including managing an online submission system (Editorial Manager) and the move to online publishing [8]. Martin also grew the use of editorials, which is an important avenue for people to share their wisdom on a variety of topics [5,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19], including Martin's own wisdom gained in his role [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31].…”

Patient rotation during linac‐based photon electron radiotherapy

“…This is a complex problem, requiring the development and use of sophisticated deformable image registration and dose accumulation systems. 32,40 The question 'do we need rotating gantries?' [37][38][39] In addition to further work leading to the resolution of the current issues around dose accumulation from deformed images, accounting for gravitational deformations during rotation of the lying patient would also require development and validation of automated techniques for: contouring and/or tracking organs based on treatment images; monitoring dose delivery to the target and all nearby OARs; adjusting the position of the beam or the patient, to improve targeting or OAR sparing; completing on-line or post-fraction adaptation (re-optimisation or re-planning) or analysis of treatment doses; and halting the treatment or gating the beam in the event of irreconcilable changes in patient anatomy.…”

“…Furthermore, as in so many areas of radiation oncology, the need for greater automation means a need for greater numbers of radiation oncologists, radiation therapists, dosimetrists and medical physicists to critically evaluate, investigate, monitor, test, and verify the automatically generated results. 32,40 The question 'do we need rotating gantries?' relates, as the authors acknowledge, to much more than patient anxiety or motion sickness alone.…”