MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530586285 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2016.00215

The MRI-Linear Accelerator Consortium: Evidence-Based Clinical Introduction of an Innovation in Radiation Oncology Connecting Researchers, Methodology, Data Collection, Quality Assurance, and Technical Development

2016· article· en· W2530586285 on OpenAlexafffund
Linda G.W. Kerkmeijer, Clifton D. Fuller, Helena M. Verkooijen, Marcel Verheij, Ananya Choudhury, Kevin J. Harrington, Chris Schultz, Arjun Sahgal, Steven J. Frank, Joel Goldwein, Kevin J. Brown, Bruce D. Minsky, Marco van Vulpen

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Hospital
FundersMedical Research CouncilUniversitair Medisch Centrum UtrechtNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchInstitute of Cancer ResearchCancer Research UKMedical College of WisconsinUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterElektaCentral Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
KeywordsQuality assuranceMedical physicsRadiation oncologyMedicineClinical OncologyComputer scienceRadiation therapyInternal medicineCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An international research consortium has been formed to facilitate evidence-based introduction of MR-guided radiotherapy (MR-linac) and to address how the MR-linac could be used to achieve an optimized radiation treatment approach to improve patients' survival, local, and regional tumor control and quality of life. The present paper describes the organizational structure of the clinical part of the MR-linac consortium. Furthermore, it elucidates why collaboration on this large project is necessary, and how a central data registry program will be implemented.

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)0.328
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.270
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3280.270
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0100.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations122
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207