MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1164146174 · doi:10.1259/bjr.20150507

Magnetic resonance for radiotherapy management and treatment planning in prostatic carcinoma

2015· review· en· W1164146174 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher S. Lim, Shawn Malone, Leonard Avruch, Rodney H. Breau, Trevor A. Flood, Megan Lim, Christopher Morash, Jeff S Quon, Cynthia Walsh, Nicola Schieda

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Radiology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation oncologistRadiation treatment planningRadiation therapyProstate cancerMagnetic resonance imagingBrachytherapyProstateRadiologyCarcinomaCancerNuclear medicinePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MRI has an important role for radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning in prostate cancer (PCa) providing accurate visualization of the dominant intraprostatic lesion (DIL) and locoregional anatomy, assessment of local staging and depiction of implanted devices. MRI enables the radiation oncologist to optimize RT planning by better defining target tumour volumes (thereby increasing local tumour control), as well as decreasing morbidity (by minimizing the dose to adjacent normal structures). Using MRI, radiation oncologists can define the DIL for delivery of boost doses of RT using a variety of techniques including: stereotactic body radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, proton RT or brachytherapy to improve tumour control. Radiologists require a familiarity with the different RT methods used to treat PCa, as well as an understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of the various MR pulse sequences available for RT planning in order to provide an optimal multidisciplinary RT treatment approach to PCa. Understanding the expected post-RT appearance of the prostate and typical characteristics of local tumour recurrence is also important because MRI is rapidly becoming an integral component for diagnosis, image-guided histological sampling and treatment planning in the setting of biochemical failure after RT or surgery.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of RadiologySame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207