BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Cited by in F6Publishing
For: Adjeiwaah M, Garpebring A, Nyholm T. Sensitivity analysis of different quality assurance methods for magnetic resonance imaging in radiotherapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2020;13:21-7. [PMID: 33458303 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2020.03.001] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
Number Citing Articles
1 Koole M, Amstrong I, Krizsan AK, Stromvall A, Visvikis D, Sattler B, Nekolla SG, Dickson J; EANM Physics committee. EANM guidelines for PET-CT and PET-MR routine quality control. Z Med Phys 2022:S0939-3889(22)00089-7. [PMID: 36167600 DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2022.08.003] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
2 Hong H, Seoung Y. Comparison of quantitative imaging parameters between two different types of stationary and mobile magnetic resonance imaging. J Korean Phys Soc . [DOI: 10.1007/s40042-022-00566-z] [Reference Citation Analysis]
3 Wyatt JJ, Mccallum HM, Maxwell RJ. Developing quality assurance tests for simultaneous Positron Emission Tomography – Magnetic Resonance imaging for radiotherapy planning. Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 2022;22:28-35. [DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2022.03.003] [Reference Citation Analysis]
4 Kavaluus H, Nousiainen K, Kaijaluoto S, Seppälä T, Saarilahti K, Tenhunen M. Determination of acceptance criteria for geometric accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging scanners used in radiotherapy planning. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2021;17:58-64. [PMID: 33898780 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2021.01.003] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
5 Drobnitzky M, vom Endt A, Dewdney A. A phantom based laser marking workflow to visually assess geometric image distortion in magnetic resonance guided radiotherapy. Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 2021;17:95-99. [DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2021.01.012] [Reference Citation Analysis]