Poster - Thurs Eve-27: Method of estimating imaging dose to patients from on-line cone-beam computed tomography using patient size data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of on-line kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is increasing as part of the current evolution of image-guided radiotherapy. At our institution, we use Varian's On Board Imager® (OBI) mainly for imaging prostate cancer patients. Since daily CBCT can add significant dose, we have performed a comprehensive set of dose measurements using acrylic cylindrical phantoms using ionization chambers as well as skin dose measurements using Thermoluminescence Dosimeters (TLD). The TLD were calibrated under chosen reference conditions (10×10 cm2 field size at 100 cm SSD) using the OBI beam with bowtie filters (125 kVp, 6.0 mm Al). For the patients, TLD were placed on the anterior, left and right lateral locations to give the peripheral dose. The CBCT dose values (in units of mGy/100mAs) were then used to model the central (phantom only) and peripheral dose (phantom and patients) as a function of equivalent diameter, deq, using exponential functions. Dose values measured in Rando phantom as well as published dose values agreed with the model quite well for deq ⩾ 24 cm (body), but there was higher variation in CBCT dose for deq ⩽ 18 cm (head). Hence, it is recommended that skin dose be measured for head scans to validate the estimate. This method provides a quick estimate of CBCT dose so that a decision can be made whether to incorporate it into the treatment prescription. Also, knowledge of CBCT dose as a function of patient size may enable reduction of the total mAs for smaller body scans.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".