MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008982889 · doi:10.1097/coc.0b013e31823a538e

A Pragmatic Contouring Guideline for Salivary Gland Structures in Head and Neck Radiation Oncology

2012· article· en· W2008982889 on OpenAlexaff
Frank Hoebers, Eugene Yu, Avi Eisbruch, Wade L. Thorstad, Brian O’Sullivan, Laura A. Dawson, Andrew Hope

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContouringHead and neckRadiation oncologySalivary glandGuidelineHead and neck cancerRadiation therapyOncologyRadiologyMedical physicsInternal medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: One of the main normal tissue toxicities in head and neck radiation oncology is xerostomia. In several studies, reduced radiation dose to the salivary glands has been shown to diminish the effects of gland dysfunction. However, no clear guidelines exist to define the anatomic location of the involved glands on cross-sectional imaging in a pragmatic manner. This study presents an anatomic, computed tomography (CT)-based definition of the major and minor salivary glands. METHODS: On the basis of information from normal structure anatomy, the location of major and minor salivary glands was identified and translated into a cross-sectional CT-based description of the salivary glands. RESULTS: The major salivary glands include the parotids and submandibular glands. The minor salivary glands are presented as a part of a surrogate structure (the Minor Oral Including Sublingual Salivary Tissue target), including the minor glands located in the oral mucosa of the tongue, hard and soft palate, buccal mucosa, and inner surface of the lips. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical implementation of CT-based delineations of the salivary glands according to the proposed guideline should reduce interobserver variability. This may lead to an improved understanding of the relationship between radiation dose and volume and effects on salivary function.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designlow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.425 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods · Other

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

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical OncologySame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207