Administered Radiopharmaceutical Doses in Children: A Survey of 13 Pediatric Hospitals in North America: TABLE 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Universally applied standards for administering radiopharmaceutical doses in children do not presently exist. Hence, pediatric radiopharmaceutical dosimetry varies considerably from institution to institution and is generally based on the recommended adult dose adjusted for body mass. METHODS: We surveyed 13 pediatric hospitals in North America to obtain objective data on dosimetry practices for 16 pediatric nuclear medicine examinations, including the minimum total radiopharmaceutical administered dose per examination, the total administered dose based on body mass, and maximum total doses in children. RESULTS: The reported administered doses of radiopharmaceuticals to children vary over a relatively large range, especially with respect to minimum total administered doses. CONCLUSION: This survey has identified a broad range of administered doses directly leading to variability in radiation-absorbed doses to patients. The nuclear medicine community should develop pediatric standards for radiopharmaceutical administered doses and reduce radiation exposure in children, such as through the use of modern software reconstruction techniques.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".