Saxsons Group

myOSL™ Chip — what the literature says.

Two independent 2025 peer-reviewed studies — Kowalski et al. (Duke) and Davis et al. (UVA), both in the Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics — characterise the BeO myOSL Chip and show it meeting or beating the discontinued Landauer nanoDot in every clinical modality tested.

2 / 2 independent 2025 validation studies
−0.5%→+3% linearity across 0.1 – 20 Gy
+1.72% TBI difference vs nanoDot — within tolerance
Product specs Physicist's dossier
Filter
Commissioning metrics — myOSL Chip
−0.5%→+3%
Linearity 0.1–20 Gy
±4.5%
Photon kQ vs 6 MV
flat
100–2500 MU/min
Linearity correction factors stayed within −0.5% to +3% across 0.1–20 Gy. No dose-rate dependence observed across the full clinical range.
Characterisation 2025
≤ ±4.5% beam-quality correction across 2.5 MV FFF to 15 MV — flat dose-rate response 100–2500 MU/min

Characterization, commissioning, and clinical evaluation of a commercial BeO optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) system

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 26(4):e70057 — Kowalski, Erickson, Wu, Li, Yoo (Duke)

Angular response (6 MV photons)
Baseline
En-face (0°)
reference orientation
vs
−2.02% ± 0.45%
Edge-on (90°)
within typical in-vivo bracket
Characterisation 2025
−2.02% ± 0.45% signal decline at 90° vs en-face — bounds the in-vivo placement correction

Angular response of the myOSL Chip vs en-face (6 MV)

Kowalski et al., JACMP 2025 26(4):e70057

Read-out depletion behaviour
−2.13%
avg / readout
−2.6%
first readout
+5%
5-min fade peak
Transient signal enhancement has a 1.8-min half-life — measurement protocols time the read accordingly (1 % residual by 15 min, 0 % by 24 h).
Characterisation 2025
−2.13% ± 0.20% average signal loss per readout — characterised, predictable, correctable

Signal depletion per readout — characterised correction

Kowalski et al., JACMP 2025 26(4):e70057

Modality-by-modality vs Landauer nanoDot
=
TBI in-vivo
=
TSET en-face
=
Electrons 6–20 MeV
=
Pacemaker / OOF
Equal-or-superior performance across every modality tested — clinics can drop in the myOSL Chip without redesigning their TG-191 in-vivo workflow.
vs nanoDot 2025
Equal/superior myOSL Chip matched or beat Al2O3:C nanoDot across TBI, TSET, electrons and out-of-field measurements

Clinical validation of myOSLchip: A beryllium oxide optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter (OSLD) system in radiotherapy dosimetry

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics — Davis, Siebers, Wijesooriya, Mistro (UVA)

TBI: myOSL Chip vs Landauer nanoDot
Reference
nanoDot (Al2O3:C)
discontinued by Landauer
vs
+1.72% ± 2.73%
myOSL Chip (BeO)
inside the in-vivo tolerance band
vs nanoDot 2025
+1.72% ± 2.73% mean difference vs Al2O3:C in TBI — within in-vivo measurement tolerance

TBI in-vivo comparison — myOSL Chip vs Al2O3:C nanoDot

Kowalski et al., JACMP 2025 (cross-validation of Davis 2025)

Back to myOSL Chip product page

myOSL™ Chip

More for this product

Each card opens a focused post for a specific specialty — clinical workflow and evidence, written for the persona you select.

For Medical Physicist

Medical Physicist

Type-test dossier

Linearity to 10 Sv, fading at 3 months, energy & angular response — the manufacturer type-test data in one page.

Read this Medical Physicist

myOSL Chip vs MOSFET dosimeters

MOSFETs need replacement every 200–400 Gy and most readers max out at 5 channels per module. What changes when you switch to BeO OSL?

Read this Medical Physicist

Why BeO OSL fits TBI dosimetry

TBI needs 8–10+ in-vivo points across a long fraction. Where does the myOSL Chip line up with the workflow — and what does the peer-reviewed evidence say?

Read this