Dose comparison between CTDI and the AAPM Report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The standard computed tomography dose index (CTDI) metric tends to underestimate scatter radiation in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition; therefore, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 111 proposed a new dosimetry methodology to measure equilibrium dose at the center of a phantom (z = 0) using a 2-cm thimble ionization chamber. In this study, we implement the CTDI and the AAPM method with a thimble chamber on adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms using the Toshiba Aquilion One CBCT and compare the results to the CTDI measured with a 10-cm pencil chamber. Following the AAPM protocol, the normalized (100 mAs) equilibrium doses (Deq) computed using dose measurements taken in the central hole of the phantom (Deq,c), the peripheral hole of the phantom, (Deq,p), and by the CTDIw equation (Deq,w) are 20.13 ± 0.19, 21.53 ± 0.48, and 20.93 ± 0.40 mGy for adult; 21.55 ± 0.40, 21.14 ± 0.43, and 21.08 ± 0.45 mGy for adolescent; and 24.58 ± 0.40, 24.92 ± 0.85, and 24.77 ± 0.72 mGy for child, respectively. The CTDIw, which measured 17.70, 19.86, and 22.43 mGy for adult, adolescent and child respectively, is about 10% lower than their corresponding Deq’s. The extended AAPM method proposed by Deman et al., which estimates the dose profile along the rotational axis (z axis), has demonstrated consistency between theoretical and experimental results for all phantoms. With the introduction of the child and the adolescent head phantoms, we not only have emphasized the practical aspects including relative convenience of the CTDI method and accuracy of the AAPM method, but also proposed a method to approximate Deq for different sized 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".