2018
DOI: 10.1088/1681-7575/aacb01
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Re-evaluation of the BIPM international dosimetry standards on adoption of the recommendations of ICRU Report 90

Abstract: Following the recommendations of ICRU Report 90, a re-evaluation has been made of the BIPM standards for air kerma in x-rays and in 60 Co and 137 Cs γ-radiations, for absorbed dose to water in 60 Co γ-radiation and for reference air-kerma rate in 192 Ir γ-radiation for brachytherapy. The changes arise from three sources: (i) the implementation of new correction factors k ii and k W for free-air ionization chambers; (ii) a re-evaluation of the mean excitation energy for graphite and water and the density effect… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on a detailed analysis by Burns [9] of over 40 experimental measurements of either I g , W air , or their product W air S g, a , ICRU-90 recommends a value of 33.72 eV for the product W air S g, a with 0.08% uncertainty and to continue using the 33.97 eV value for W air , but increasing its uncertainty from 0.15% to 0.35%. Consequently, from the above recommendations, an S g, a value of 0.9926 follows with a similar uncertainty as W air , implying a 0.8% decrease from the previously accepted value of 1.0010 and in excellent agreement with the BIPM adopted value of 0.9928 [10].…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…Based on a detailed analysis by Burns [9] of over 40 experimental measurements of either I g , W air , or their product W air S g, a , ICRU-90 recommends a value of 33.72 eV for the product W air S g, a with 0.08% uncertainty and to continue using the 33.97 eV value for W air , but increasing its uncertainty from 0.15% to 0.35%. Consequently, from the above recommendations, an S g, a value of 0.9926 follows with a similar uncertainty as W air , implying a 0.8% decrease from the previously accepted value of 1.0010 and in excellent agreement with the BIPM adopted value of 0.9928 [10].…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…The uncertainties of 𝜌, (𝜇 en /𝜌) air,c , 𝑔 air , 𝑘 h , 𝑘 s and 𝐼 were chosen in accordance with our previous work [3,12,13]. The uncertainty of the product 𝑊 air 𝑠 c,a /𝑒 was chosen in accordance with the work of Burns et al [17]. The type A uncertainties of 𝑘 wall,ps , 𝑘 st , 𝑘 pn and 𝑘 sa represent the statistical uncertainties of the Monte Carlo simulations.…”
Section: Uncertainty Budgetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The simulated air kerma rate and measured air kerma rate are expressed by a linear regression equation [12] for comparative analysis. The linear regression equation used in the accredited calibration laboratory has traceability to international measurement standards for air kerma [14]. Thus, model benchmarking will be more reliable.…”
Section: Jinst 15 P12014mentioning
confidence: 99%