MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057254768 · doi:10.2349/biij.3.1.e17

Tomotherapy as a tool in image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT): current clinical experience and outcomes

2007· article· en· W2057254768 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Slav Yartsev, Tomas Kron, Jake Van Dyk

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Imaging and Intervention Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
FundersGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsTomotherapyImage-guided radiation therapyMedical physicsMedicineRadiation therapyContext (archaeology)Radiation treatment planningMedical imagingModalitiesModality (human–computer interaction)Quality assuranceRadiologyNuclear medicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern radiotherapy is characterised by a better target definition through medical imaging accompanied by significantly improved radiation delivery methods, most notably Intensity-Modulate Radiation Therapy (IMRT). However, the treatment can only be as accurate as the positioning of patients for their daily radiotherapy fraction. It is in this context that a number of imaging modalities - ranging from ultrasound to on-board kilovoltage imaging and computed tomography (CT) - have found their way into the treatment room where they verify accurate patient positioning prior to or even during delivery of radiation. Helical tomotherapy (HT) combines IMRT delivery with in-built image guidance using megavoltage CT scanning. This paper discusses the initial experience of different centres with IGRT using HT illustrated by a number of clinical examples from the installation in London in Ontario, Canada, one of the world's first HT sites. We found that HT allows the delivery of highly conformal radiation dose distributions combined with adequate daily image acquisition. An important feature of this unit is its seamless integration, which also includes a customised inverse treatment planning system and a quality assurance module for individual patients.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.403 · 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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Imaging and Intervention JournalSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207