Rationale and design of the worldwide prospective multicenter registry on radiation dose estimates of cardiac CT angiography in daily practice in 2017 (PROTECTION VI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac computed tomography angiography (cardiac CTA) is an increasingly used versatile imaging method to evaluate coronary and cardiac morphology. Owing to improvements in technology, image quality has continuously improved over the last 10-20 years. At the same time, numerous non-randomized and randomized studies have been performed to reduce the associated radiation exposure. Currently, it is unclear if the advances in technology and knowledge about radiation reduction translated into reduced levels of cardiac CTA radiation dose in daily clinical practice as well as a wide utilization of dose-saving strategies. METHODS: The PROTECTION VI study is a multicenter, prospective, worldwide registry designed to evaluate radiation dose exposure, utilization of dose-saving strategies and diagnostic image quality during cardiac CTA in current daily practice. Assessment of image quality will be addressed by the evaluation of diagnostic image quality at the local study site and the calculation of quantitative image quality parameters in an imaging core laboratory. Above 4000 patients will be enrolled from approximately 70 sites in Europe, North America, South America, Asia and Australia. The study will analyze median radiation dose levels, image quality, frequency of use and efficacy of algorithms for dose reduction, and patient and study-related predictors associated with radiation dose. CONCLUSIONS: The PROTECTION VI study is designed to provide a reliable estimate of current radiation dose for cardiac CTA and to assess the potential for additional dose reductions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".