MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144371500 · doi:10.1118/1.4772190

A comparative study of small field total scatter factors and dose profiles using plastic scintillation detectors and other stereotactic dosimeters: The case of the CyberKnife

2013· article· en· W2144371500 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Morin, Dominic Béliveau‐Nadeau, Eunah Chung, Jan Seuntjens, Dany Thériault, Louis Archambault, Sam Beddar, Luc Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecMontreal General HospitalHôtel-Dieu de QuébecMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalHôpital Notre-Dame
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsDosimeterDosimetryCyberknifeDetectorScintillationOpticsPercentage depth dose curveMonte Carlo methodPhysicsMaterials scienceDose profileDiodeNuclear medicineRadiosurgeryRadiationIonization chamberOptoelectronicsBeam (structure)MedicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Small-field dosimetry is challenging, and the main limitations of most dosimeters are insufficient spatial resolution, water nonequivalence, and energy dependence. The purpose of this study was to compare plastic scintillation detectors (PSDs) to several commercial stereotactic dosimeters by measuring total scatter factors and dose profiles on a CyberKnife system. METHODS: Two PSDs were developed, having sensitive volumes of 0.196 and 0.785 mm(3), and compared with other detectors. The spectral discrimination method was applied to subtract Čerenkov light from the signal. Both PSDs were compared to four commercial stereotactic dosimeters by measuring total scatter factors, namely, an IBA dosimetry stereotactic field diode (SFD), a PTW 60008 silicon diode, a PTW 60012 silicon diode, and a microLion. The measured total scatter factors were further compared with those of two independent Monte Carlo studies. For the dose profiles, two commercial detectors were used for the comparison, i.e., a PTW 60012 silicon diode and Gafchromics EBT2. Total scatter factors for a CyberKnife system were measured in circular fields with diameters from 5 to 60 mm. Dose profiles were measured for the 5- and 60-mm cones. The measurements were performed in a water tank at a 1.5-cm depth and an 80-cm source-axis distance. RESULTS: The total scatter factors measured using all the detectors agreed within 1% with the Monte Carlo values for cones of 20 mm or greater in diameter. For cones of 10-20 mm in diameter, the PTW 60008 silicon diode was the only dosimeter whose measurements did not agree within 1% with the Monte Carlo values. For smaller fields (<10 mm), each dosimeter type showed different behaviors. The silicon diodes over-responded because of their water nonequivalence; the microLion and 1.0-mm PSD under-responded because of a volume-averaging effect; and the 0.5-mm PSD was the only detector within the uncertainties of the Monte Carlo simulations for all the cones. The PSDs, the PTW 60012 silicon diode, and the Gafchromics EBT2 agreed within 2% and 0.2 mm (gamma evaluation) for the measured dose profiles except in the tail of the 60-mm cone. CONCLUSIONS: Silicon diodes can be used to accurately measure small-field dose profiles but not to measure total scatter factors, whereas PSDs can be used to accurately measure both. The authors' measurements show that the use of a 1.0-mm PSD resulted in a negligible volume-averaging effect (under-response of ≈1%) down to a field size of 5 mm. Therefore, PSDs are strong candidates to become reference radiosurgery detectors for beam characterization and quality assurance measurements.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations89
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207