MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2470585517 · doi:10.1118/1.4957275

MO-FG-BRC-01: MR-Guided Radiation Therapy with Gadolinium Nanoparticles: From Chalkboard to First Clinical Trials

2016· article· en· W2470585517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lucie Sancey

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical physicsExcellenceMedical imagingRadiation therapyMedical physicistPreclinical researchMedicineImage-guided radiation therapyLinear particle acceleratorNuclear medicineComputer sciencePhysicsRadiologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experimental research in medical physics has expanded the limits of our knowledge and provided novel imaging and therapy technologies for patients around the world. However, experimental efforts are challenging due to constraints in funding, space, time and other forms of institutional support. In this joint ESTRO-AAPM symposium, four exciting experimental projects from four different countries are highlighted. Each project is focused on a different aspect of radiation therapy. From the USA, we will hear about a new linear accelerator concept for more compact and efficient therapy devices. From Canada, we will learn about novel linear accelerator target design and the implications for imaging and therapy. From France, we will discover a mature translational effort to incorporate theranostic nanoparticles in MR-guided radiation therapy. From Germany, we will find out about a novel in-treatment imaging modality for particle therapy. These examples of high impact, experimental medical physics research are representative of the diversity of such efforts that are on-going around the globe. J. Robar, Research is supported through collaboration with Varian Medical Systems and Brainlab AGD. Westerly, This work is supported by the Department of Radiation Oncology at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. COI: NONEK. Parodi, Part of the presented work is supported by the DFG (German Research Foundation) Cluster of Excellence MAP (Munich-Centre for Advanced Photonics) and has been carried out in collaboration with IBA.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.402
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207