SU‐E‐I‐91: Use of the ACR CT Accreditation Phantom for Routine Quality Assurance of CBCT Imaging Systems in a Radiotherapy Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Image guided radiation therapy using cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) is becoming routine practice in modern radiation therapy. The purpose of this work was to develop an imaging QA program for CT and CBCT units in our department based on the ACR CT accreditation phantom (model 464, Gammex‐RMI). It has four testing modules permitting one to test CT number accuracy, slice width, low contrast resolution, image uniformity, in plane distance accuracy, and high contrast resolution reproducibly with suggested window/levels for image analysis. Methods: Baseline values were obtained from images acquired on a Phillips Brilliance Big Bore CT simulator and CBCT images acquired on three Varian OBIs. DICOM images were exported and analyzed with software (Automated CT Software, Gammex‐RMI) or manually (OsiriX). Baseline values will be used to ensure that image quality stays consistent quarterly. Results: Initial CT simulator images showed that image quality was within ACR guidelines for all tested scanning protocols. Due to image noise and reconstruction artifacts, manual analysis should be used for future analysis of CBCT images. Image analysis from two OBIs showed that the HU calibration had drifted or was not properly calibrated, while the third OBI showed reasonable agreement with accepted values. All three OBIs were unable to distinguish the low contrast resolution plugs, had the same high contrast resolution, were within 0.7 mm of the accepted in plane resolution, and were within 0.5 mm of the nominal slice width. Conclusions: Preliminary analysis shows that the ACR phantom could be modified to be more useful in evaluating the low contrast resolution of CBCT systems. Suggestions will be made as to how ACR guidelines for image analysis could be modified to better suit CBCT systems, such as for image uniformity. It is expected to eventually incorporate all departmental CT imaging systems in into this imaging QA program.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".