MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2058006447 · doi:10.1118/1.2031056

Sci‐AM2 Sat ‐ 06: IMRT prostate planning‐determination of the minimum MU/segment

2005· article· en· W2058006447 on OpenAlexaff
Г Григоров, James C. L. Chow, Rebecca Barnett

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooGrand River Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonitor unitNuclear medicineDosimetryPinnacleRadiation treatment planningDose rateMedicineProstatePercentage depth dose curveIonization chamberRadiation therapyPhysicsRadiologyMedical physicsCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For step and shoot IMRT, the combination of high dose rate, multiple beam segments and low dose per segment can lead to significant differences between the planned and delivered dose to the patient. This problem, known as an “overshoot” effect, is the result of current dose servo limitations and is demonstrated by over‐ and under‐dose in the first and the last segment respectively. Segment dose inaccuracy in the range of 10 to 60% of the both segments for 1 monitor unit (MU) per segment irradiated with dose rate (DR) of 100 to 600 MU/min was measured. The object of this study was to find a method for segment dose correction when small MU and high DR are used, and specify the prostate IMRT planning limits for MU/segment and the DR. The reported results were obtained using Pinnacle3‐V6 and Varian Clinac 2100 EX linear accelerator equipped with a 120‐leaf millennium MLC. The methodology for correcting dose employs small field segment dose ratio. The segment dose error after correction was measured to be less than 5 % for all dose rates. For prostate step and shoot IMRT a low limit of 1 MU per segment and DR with upper limit of 600 MU/min can be used. The results of this work relate to the agreement between planned and delivered doses of the prostate IMRT.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.008

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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