Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Biological Effects of Radiation02:59

Biological Effects of Radiation

15.4K
All radioactive nuclides emit high-energy particles or electromagnetic waves. When this radiation encounters living cells, it can cause heating, break chemical bonds, or ionize molecules. The most serious biological damage results when these radioactive emissions fragment or ionize molecules. For example, α and β particles emitted from nuclear decay reactions possess much higher energies than ordinary chemical bond energies. When these particles strike and penetrate matter, they...
15.4K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Evaluation of extrapolation chamber response for surface and buildup dose assessment in radiotherapy photon beams using Monte Carlo simulations.

Medical physics·2026
Same author

Update of the CLRP Monte Carlo TG-43 parameter database for high-energy brachytherapy sources.

Medical physics·2022
Same author

On pathlength and energy straggling of megavoltage electrons slowing down.

Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB)·2020
Same author

Update of the CLRP TG-43 parameter database for low-energy brachytherapy sources.

Medical physics·2020
Same author

On calculating kerma, collision kerma and radiative yields.

Medical physics·2019
Same author

Inverse square corrections for FACs and WAFACs.

Applied radiation and isotopes : including data, instrumentation and methods for use in agriculture, industry and medicine·2019
Same journal

Correction to "On the shape of the radiation survival curve in tumor spheroids: The role of oxygen heterogeneity".

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Multi-view constrained semi-supervised vertebra detection for 3D ultrasound spine volume.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Accuracy of quantitative <sup>177</sup>Lu SPECT/CT imaging: A systematic review.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Physics-constrained dual-domain network for CBCT reconstruction from orthogonal X-rays in gynecologic radiotherapy.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Decomposition-based harmonization for quantitative PET imaging across scanners and radiotracers.

Medical physics·2026
Same journal

Development and evaluation of an in vivo dose-based monitoring system for electron FLASH radiation therapy.

Medical physics·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 27, 2025

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage 40-300 kV X-Ray Facilities
06:51

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage 40-300 kV X-Ray Facilities

Published on: February 20, 2021

5.0K

Minimum phantom size for megavoltage photon beam reference dosimetry.

D W O Rogers1

  • 1Carleton Laboratory for Radiotherapy Physics, Department of Physics, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.

Medical Physics
|April 26, 2024
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Water phantom size requirements for dosimetry were investigated. Standard phantom sizes are adequate, but corrections are needed for smaller phantoms to ensure accurate dose measurements.

Keywords:
Monte CarloTG51TRS398photon beamsreference dosimetrywater phantoms

More Related Videos

Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ &#945; and &#946; Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition
06:20

Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ α and β Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition

Published on: March 11, 2021

7.2K
Proton Therapy Delivery and Its Clinical Application in Select Solid Tumor Malignancies
08:34

Proton Therapy Delivery and Its Clinical Application in Select Solid Tumor Malignancies

Published on: February 6, 2019

20.3K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 27, 2025

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage 40-300 kV X-Ray Facilities
06:51

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage 40-300 kV X-Ray Facilities

Published on: February 20, 2021

5.0K
Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ &#945; and &#946; Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition
06:20

Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ α and β Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition

Published on: March 11, 2021

7.2K
Proton Therapy Delivery and Its Clinical Application in Select Solid Tumor Malignancies
08:34

Proton Therapy Delivery and Its Clinical Application in Select Solid Tumor Malignancies

Published on: February 6, 2019

20.3K

Area of Science:

  • Medical Physics
  • Radiation Dosimetry
  • Radiotherapy Physics

Background:

  • Water phantoms are essential for reference dosimetry and beam quality measurements.
  • Published studies on optimal water phantom dimensions are lacking.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To determine the necessary size of water phantoms for reference dosimetry.
  • To investigate phantom size effects on beam quality specifiers (e.g., %dd(10) and kQ).

Main Methods:

  • Monte Carlo simulations using EGSnrc (DOSXYZnrc) were employed.
  • Simulations covered various phantom dimensions and photon beam energies (e.g., 6X and 6MV).
  • Dose per incident fluence and beam quality specifiers were calculated, considering different measurement methods (A and B).

Main Results:

  • Phantom dimensions showed minimal impact on dosimetry for phantoms exceeding a certain size.
  • Correction factors for dose at 10 cm depth in smaller phantoms were provided (up to 0.75%).
  • Differences in beam quality specifier measurements were observed between methods A and B, especially for smaller phantoms.

Conclusions:

  • Current water phantom size recommendations in protocols (TG-51, IAEA TRS-398) are sufficient for accurate reference dosimetry.
  • Correction factors are crucial for precise dose measurements in smaller phantoms.
  • Consistent reporting of phantom size and measurement method is vital for beam quality specification.