MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2033275958 · doi:10.1118/1.3244125

Poster — Wed Eve—21: 2D CBCT Dosimetry Using XR‐QA Model GAFCHROMIC Film

2009· article· en· W2033275958 on OpenAlexaff
Nada Tomic, Jan Seuntjens, F DeBlois, Slobodan Dević

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDosimetryImaging phantomKermaScannerDose profileNuclear medicineMaterials scienceCalibrationCone beam computed tomographyOpticsPhysicsMedicineComputed tomographyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a 2D reference dosimetry system for dose measurements during cone‐beam computed tomograpfy (CBCT) scans using on‐board imager (OBI) on Varian Clinac‐iX linear accelerator that employs XR‐QA radiochromic film model, specifically designed for measurements at low energy photons. We report on surface doses and percent depth dose (PDDs) measurements during clinical CBCT scans on a humanoid Rando phantom. Response of XR‐QA model radiochromic film reference dosimetry system was calibrated in terms of air kerma in air. Pieces of XR‐QA films were taped on surface of the Rando phantom for surface dose, and XR‐QA film strips placed between Rando slices for PDDs measurements, during CBCT scans for different sites and CBCT protocols. Spatial dosimetry was performed using an Epson Expression 10000XL document scanner. Change in optical reflectance of unexposed film was subtracted from the exposed one to obtain final netR, which was converted to dose using previously determined calibration curve. Our measurements show that skin dose ranges from 0.07 cGy in Low Dose Head to 4.64 cGy in Pelvis Spot Light CBCT protocol, with uncertainty of 2% at higher doses, rising to 4% at 0.5 cGy and 12% at the lowest measured dose. Film strip profile measurements show different dose distributions depending on the CBCT mode used and the anatomical site imaged. The main advantage of the described system for dose measurements during CBCT scans is that it does not require a priori knowledge of the backscatter factors while providing 2D reference dosimetry at low kVp photon beams.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.013

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Physics→Same topicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques→French-language works237,207→