MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001465542 · doi:10.1118/1.1510128

Development of contrast digital mammography

2002· article· en· W2001465542 on OpenAlexaff
Mia Skarpathiotakis, Martin J. Yaffe, Aili K. Bloomquist, Dan Rico, Serge Muller, Andreas Rick, Fanny Jeunehomme

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMammographyDigital mammographyImaging phantomNuclear medicineComputed radiographyMaterials scienceKermaDosimetryOpticsRadiologyBreast cancerMedicinePhysicsComputer scienceImage qualityCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of breast tumors is often accompanied by angiogenesis--the formation of new blood vessels. It is possible to image the effects of this process by tracking the uptake and washout of contrast agents in the vicinity of a lesion. In this article, a method for carrying out contrast subtraction mammography on a full-field digital mammography unit is described. Spectral measurements and modeling were performed to optimize the choice of x-ray target, kilovoltage and x-ray beam filtration for contrast digital mammography (CDM) on an available digital mammography system. Phantom studies were carried out to determine the sensitivity of CDM to iodine. Detection of iodine area densities of 0.3 mg/cm2 is possible for a circular object with a radius of 1.3 mm, which allows detection of uptake levels in the breast typically seen with cancer and some benign breast conditions. It was found that with a molybdenum anode x-ray tube, copper filtration could be used to effectively shape the x-ray spectrum to maximize the proportion of x rays with energies above the k edge of iodine. Simple logarithmic subtraction was found to be adequate in suppressing background signals dependent on the x-ray beam intensity and background thickness of the breast. The total x-ray dose from the procedure ranges between 1 and 3 mGy, similar to that from a conventional single view film mammogram. A clinical pilot study is currently being carried out to evaluate this technique.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations113
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207