MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140370697 · doi:10.1667/rr2839.1

Biological Effects of Proton Radiation: What We Know and Don't Know

2013· review· en· W2140370697 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Swati Girdhani, Rainer K. Sachs, Lynn Hlatky

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Research · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsRadiobiologyRelative biological effectivenessProtonProton therapyBiological effectBiologyMedical physicsPhysicsMedicineRadiationIrradiationNuclear physicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An understanding of proton radiobiology is critical for optimization of both proton radiotherapy and assessment of carcinogenesis risk from space radiation. Although the physical aspects of proton beam radiobiology is well understood, the biological aspects, particularly the complex biological end points, have been underexplored and underexploited. This review focuses on the biological responses observed to date, across various scales, molecular, cellular and especially tissue levels. Proton-induced perturbations of gene expression, along with signaling and functional alterations in cell cycle, invasion, angiogenesis and metastasis are included. Particular emphasis is placed on differences noted in the literature between biological effects induced by protons and those induced by high-energy photons. An appreciation of the unique physical and biological characteristics of proton radiobiology should augment current strategies both to enhance therapeutic effectiveness and to quantify risk related to proton irradiation.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations154
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation ResearchSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207