MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017200181 · doi:10.7785/tcrt.2012.500191

Geometric Performance and Efficiency of an Optical Tracking System for Daily Pre-treatment Positioning in Pelvic Radiotherapy Patients

2011· article· en· W2017200181 on OpenAlexaff
Winnie Li, Fanny Sie, Gregory Bootsma, D Moseley, Charles Catton, David A. Jaffray

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology in Cancer Research & Treatment · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation therapyNuclear medicineMedicineSignificant differenceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to characterize the accuracy of a novel in-house optical tracking system (OTS), and to determine its efficiency for daily pre-treatment positioning of pelvic radiotherapy patients compared to conventional optical distance indicator (ODI) methodology. The OTS is comprised of a passive infrared stereoscopic camera, and custom control software for use in assisting radiotherapy patient setup. Initially, the system was calibrated and tested for stability inside a radiation therapy treatment room. Subsequently, under an ethics approved protocol, the clinical efficiency of the OTS was compared to conventional ODI setup methodology through 17 pelvic radiotherapy patients. Differences between orthogonal source-to-skin distance (SSD) readings and overall set-up time resultant from both systems were compared. The precision of the OTS was 0.01 ± 0.01 mm, 0.02 ± 0.02 mm, and -0.01 ± 0.06 mm in the left/right (L/R), anterior/posterior (A/P), and cranial/caudal (C/C) directions, respectively. Discrepancies measured between the linac radiographic center in the treatment room and the calibrated origin of the camera (OTS) by two independent observers was submillimeter. Analysis of 146 fractions from 17 patients showed a high correlation between the SSD readings of the OTS and ODI setup methodologies (r = 0.99). The average time for pre-treatment positioning using the OTS couch shift calculation was 2.60 ± 0.69 minutes, and for conventional ODI setup, 3.62 ± 0.82 minutes; the difference of 1.02 minutes was statistically significant (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the OTS is a precise and robust tool for use as an independent check of treatment room patient positioning. The system is indicated as geometrically equivalent to current methods of daily pre-treatment patient positioning with potential for gains in efficiency by decreasing setup times in the treatment room.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology in Cancer Research & TreatmentSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207