Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMillar, W Ten
dc.contributor.authorHendry, Jolyon Hen
dc.contributor.authorDavidson, Susan Een
dc.date.accessioned2013-12-20T11:30:23Z
dc.date.available2013-12-20T11:30:23Z
dc.date.issued2013-09
dc.identifier.citationBiphasic and monophasic repair: comparative implications for biologically equivalent dose calculations in pulsed dose rate brachytherapy of cervical carcinoma. 2013, 86 (1029):20130288 Br J Radiolen
dc.identifier.issn1748-880X
dc.identifier.pmid23934965
dc.identifier.doi10.1259/bjr.20130288
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10541/308813
dc.description.abstractTo consider the implications of the use of biphasic rather than monophasic repair in calculations of biologically-equivalent doses for pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy of cervix carcinoma.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rightsArchived with thanks to The British journal of radiologyen
dc.subject.meshAnimals
dc.subject.meshBrachytherapy
dc.subject.meshDose-Response Relationship, Radiation
dc.subject.meshFemale
dc.subject.meshLinear Models
dc.subject.meshModels, Biological
dc.subject.meshRadiation Dosage
dc.subject.meshRectum
dc.subject.meshSurvival Rate
dc.subject.meshUterine Cervical Neoplasms
dc.subject.meshWound Healing
dc.titleBiphasic and monophasic repair: comparative implications for biologically equivalent dose calculations in pulsed dose rate brachytherapy of cervical carcinoma.en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentBeatson Oncology Centre, Gartnavel Hospital, Glasgow, UK.en
dc.identifier.journalThe British Journal of Radiologyen
html.description.abstractTo consider the implications of the use of biphasic rather than monophasic repair in calculations of biologically-equivalent doses for pulsed-dose-rate brachytherapy of cervix carcinoma.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record