MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070337209 · doi:10.1118/1.3366254

Development of a water calorimetry-based standard for absorbed dose to water in HDR I192r brachytherapy

2010· article· en· W2070337209 on OpenAlexafffund
Arman Sarfehnia, Jan Seuntjens

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBrachytherapyDosimetryAbsorbed doseMedical physicsNuclear medicineRadiometryMedicineRadiation therapyRadiologyPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The aim of this article is to develop and evaluate a primary standard for HDR 192Ir brachytherapy based on 4 degrees C stagnant water calorimetry. METHODS: The absolute absorbed dose to water was directly measured for several different Nucletron microSelectron 192Ir sources of air kerma strength ranging between 21,000 and 38,000 U and for source-to-detector separations ranging between 25 and 70 mm. The COMSOL MULTIPHYSICS software was used to accurately calculate the heat transport in a detailed model geometry. Through a coupling of the "conduction and convection" module with the "Navier-Stokes incompressible fluid" module in the software, both the conductive and convective effects were modeled. RESULTS: A detailed uncertainty analysis resulted in an overall uncertainty in the absorbed dose of 1.90% (1 sigma). However, this includes a 1.5% uncertainty associated with a nonlinear predrift correction which can be substantially reduced if sufficient time is provided for the system to come to a new equilibrium in between successive calorimetric runs, an opportunity not available to the authors in their clinical setting due to time constraints on the machine. An average normalized dose rate of 361 +/- 7 microGy/(h U) at a source-to-detector separation of 55 mm was measured for the microSelectron 192Ir source based on water calorimetry. The measured absorbed dose per air kerma strength agreed to better than 0.8% (1 sigma) with independent ionization chamber and EBT-1 Gafchromic film reference dosimetry as well as with the currently accepted AAPM TG-43 protocol measurements. CONCLUSIONS: This work paves the way toward a primary absorbed dose to water standard in 192Ir brachytherapy.

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)0.007
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207