2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.radmeas.2019.106207
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Scintillator screen for measuring dose distribution in scanned carbon-ion therapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
11
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
3
11
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Quenching occurs when many excitons are produced by high LET particles and results in the depletion of activator sites. These differences due to the quenching effect are similar to those reported in other studies on pencil beams [ 18 , 20 ], and they are much smaller than those of the Gd scintillator, which produced an underestimation at the Bragg peak of approximately 40% [ 14 , 20 ]. The differences between the scintillator and ion-chamber data for the SOBP beam are much smaller than those of the mono-energetic beam, which can be attributed to the smaller LET of the SOBP beams ( Figs 5 and 6 ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Quenching occurs when many excitons are produced by high LET particles and results in the depletion of activator sites. These differences due to the quenching effect are similar to those reported in other studies on pencil beams [ 18 , 20 ], and they are much smaller than those of the Gd scintillator, which produced an underestimation at the Bragg peak of approximately 40% [ 14 , 20 ]. The differences between the scintillator and ion-chamber data for the SOBP beam are much smaller than those of the mono-energetic beam, which can be attributed to the smaller LET of the SOBP beams ( Figs 5 and 6 ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…The ZnS scintillator underestimates the SOBP center by approximately 10%, which is a significantly lower underestimation than that of the mono-energetic passive and pencil beams ( Fig. 6 ) [ 18 , 20 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations