MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2504030762 · doi:10.1120/jacmp.v17i4.6021

Experimental validation of a kV source model and dose computation method for CBCT imaging in an anthropomorphic phantom

2016· article· en· W2504030762 on OpenAlexaff
Yannick Poirier, Mauro Tambasco

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomNuclear medicineThermoluminescent dosimeterCone beam computed tomographyAbsorbed doseIonization chamberDose profilePhysicsDosimetryComputed tomographyMedicineDosimeterRadiologyIonization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an experimental validation of a kilovoltage (kV) X-ray source characterization model in an anthropomorphic phantom to estimate patient-specific absorbed dose from kV cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging procedures and compare these doses to nominal weighted CT-dose index (CTDIw) dose estimates. We simulated the default Varian on-board imager 1.4 (OBI) default CBCT imaging protocols (i.e., standard-dose head, low-dose thorax, pelvis, and pelvis spotlight) using our previously developed and easy to implement X-ray point-source model and source characterization approach. We used this characterized source model to compute absorbed dose in homogeneous and anthropomorphic phantoms using our previously validated in-house kV dose computation software (kVDoseCalc). We compared these computed absorbed doses to doses derived from ionization chamber measurements acquired at several points in a homogeneous cylindrical phantom and from thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) placed in the anthropomorphic phantom. In the homogeneous cylindrical phantom, computed values of absorbed dose relative to the center of the phantom agreed with measured values within ≤2% of local dose, except in regions of high-dose gradient where the distance to agreement (DTA) was 2 mm. The computed absorbed dose in the anthropomorphic phantom generally agreed with TLD measurements, with an average percent dose difference ranging from 2.4% ± 6.0% to 5.7% ± 10.3%, depending on the characterized CBCT imaging protocol. The low-dose thorax and the standard dose scans showed the best and worst agreement, respectively. Our results also broadly agree with published values, which are approximately twice as high as the nominal CTDIw would suggest. The results demonstrate that our previously developed method for modeling and characterizing a kV X-ray source could be used to accurately assess patient-specific absorbed dose from kV CBCT procedures within reasonable accuracy, and serve as further evidence that existing CTDIw assessments underestimate absorbed dose delivered to patients.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207