MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143996584 · doi:10.1118/1.2839104

Patient dosimetry for hybrid MRI‐radiotherapy systems

2008· article· en· W2143996584 on OpenAlexafffund
C.J.G. Kirkby, T Stanescu, S Rathee, Marco Carlone, B. Murray, B. G. Fallone

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Cancer Foundation
FundersAlberta Cancer Foundation
KeywordsDosimetryMedical physicsRadiation therapyMedical imagingMedicineMedical physicistNuclear medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel geometry has been proposed for a hybrid magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-linac system in which a 6 MV linac is mounted on the open end of a biplanar, low field (0.2 T) MRI magnet on a single gantry that is free to rotate around the patient. This geometry creates a scenario in which the magnetic field vector remains fixed with respect to the incident photon beam, but moves with respect to the patient as the gantry rotates. Other proposed geometries are characterized by a radiation source rotating about a fixed cylindrical magnet where the magnetic field vector remains fixed with respect to the patient. In this investigation we simulate the inherent dose distribution patterns within the two MRI-radiation source geometries using PENELOPE and EGSnrc Monte Carlo radiation transport codes with algorithms implemented to account for the magnetic field deflection of charged particles. Simulations are performed in phantoms and for clinically realistic situations. The novel geometry results in a net Lorentz force that remains fixed with respect to the patient (in the cranial-caudal direction) and results in a cumulative influence on dose distribution for a multiple beam treatment scenario. For a case where patient anatomy is reasonably homogeneous (brain plan), differences in dose compared to a conventional (no magnetic field) case are minimal for the novel geometry. In the case of a lung plan where the inhomogeneous patient anatomy allows for the magnetic field to have significant influence on charged particle transport, larger differences occur in a predictable manner. For a system using a fixed cylindrical geometry and higher magnetic field (1.5 T), differences from the case without a magnetic field are significantly greater.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations141
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207