Operational and Dosimetric Aspects of Pediatric PET/CT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No consistent guidelines exist for the acquisition of a CT scan as part of pediatric PET/CT. Given that children may be more vulnerable to the effects of ionizing radiation, it is necessary to develop methods that provide diagnostic-quality imaging when needed, in the shortest time and with the lowest patient radiation exposure. This article describes the basics of CT dosimetry and PET/CT acquisition in children. We describe the variability in pediatric PET/CT techniques, based on a survey of 19 PET/CT pediatric institutions in North America. The results of the survey demonstrated that, although most institutions used automatic tube current modulation, there remained a large variation of practice, on the order of a factor of 2-3, across sites, pointing to the need for guidelines. We introduce the approach developed at our institution for using a multiseries PET/CT acquisition technique that combines diagnostic-quality CT in the essential portion of the field of view and a low-dose technique to image the remainder of the body. This approach leads to a reduction in radiation dose to the patient while combining the PET and the diagnostic CT into a single acquisition. The standardization of pediatric PET/CT provides an opportunity for a reduction in the radiation dose to these patients while maintaining an appropriate level of diagnostic image quality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".