MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991440158 · doi:10.1002/hed.23060

Intraoperative cone‐beam CT for head and neck surgery: Feasibility of clinical implementation using a prototype mobile C‐arm

2012· article· en· W1991440158 on OpenAlexaff
Emma V. King, Michael J. Daly, Harley Chan, Gideon Bachar, Benjamin J. Dixon, Jeffrey H. Siewerdsen, Jonathan C. Irish

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineCone beam computed tomographyWorkflowHead and neckCone beam ctRadiologyArtifact (error)VisualizationMedical physicsSurgeryComputed tomographyArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative 3-dimensional (3D) imaging in head and neck surgery was developed using a prototype mobile C-arm for cone-beam CT (CBCT). This article summarizes its implementation in a prospective pilot and feasibility study. METHODS: The CBCT C-arm was used in 12 head and neck surgical oncology cases. Human-factors engineering methods and expert feedback from surgeons, nurses, and anesthetists were used to evaluate the impact of intraoperative imaging on the surgical environment and clinical workflow. Image quality of CBCT and the perceived clinical utility were evaluated. RESULTS: The CBCT C-arm was successfully incorporated in 12 head and neck cases and streamlined into the surgical environment. Reviewed 3D-CBCT images were qualitatively sufficient for intraoperative-guidance for bony detail. Additional artifact management is required to improve soft-tissue visualization. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative CBCT provides high-quality images for visualization of bony detail and is feasible during major head and neck surgery with acceptable workflow interruptions. Operations with significant bone ablation and/or reconstruction involving complex 3D anatomical structures are likely to benefit from the updated imaging.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations54
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207