Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The purpose of this article is to understand the way in which medical physicists take into account treatment effectiveness and safety when selecting a treatment plan, with respect to the medical prescription and the technical, human and organizational resources available. Data-gathering was based on the allo-confrontation method: 14 medical physicists from five different treatment centers commented on real treatment plans that had been drawn up by their colleagues. Results show that medical physicists have two means at their disposal to control treatment effectiveness and safety: risk avoidance and risk reduction. Risk avoidance is achieved when conceiving the solution. Risk reduction occurs after the design of the plan and consists in accompanying and assisting the radiographers at the work station where the treatment is carried out.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2012-0414-1956 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!