Trends in Radiation Practices for Female Ocular Oncologists in North America: A Collaborative Study of the International Society of Ocular Oncology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the known radiation exposure, attitudes, and consequent risk modifications among female ocular oncologists in North America who routinely administer radioactive plaque brachytherapy treatment and are members of the International Society of Ocular Oncology. METHODS: Nineteen female ocular oncologists completed an anonymous 17-question radiation exposure survey. RESULTS: Eleven of the participants chose to routinely wear lead protection during surgery; 8 did not. Fifteen of 19 participants reported using an unloaded "nonactive" template to prepare for plaque implantation. During pregnancy, 11 of 13 participants continued to perform plaque brachytherapy. Eight of these 11 undertook measures to decrease radiation exposure self-reported as lead wear and other. The average reported anxiety regarding fertility was 2.1 (SD, 2.2) on a scale from 1 to 10. CONCLUSION: This study corroborates prior literature that surgeons' exposure to radiation during plaque brachytherapy is minimal. Nonetheless, there remains some anxiety regarding exposure risk to women, due to potential effects on fertility and fetal health. We found variability in exposure monitoring, required training, and precautions during pregnancy amongst this group of surgeons. Improved education and clearer pregnancy guidelines may equip female ocular oncologists with optimal knowledge regarding risk of radiation exposure.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".