MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2844887757 · doi:10.1002/acm2.12408

A framework for clinical commissioning of 3D‐printed patient support or immobilization devices in photon radiotherapy

2018· article· en· W2844887757 on OpenAlexaff
Tyler Meyer, Sarah Quirk, Malgorzata D'Souza, David P. Spencer, Michael Roumeliotis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
Keywords3d printedCharacterization (materials science)Computer sciencePrinted circuit boardMedical physicsMaterials scienceEngineering drawingBiomedical engineeringMedicineNanotechnologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The objective of this work is to outline a framework for dosimetric characterization that will comprehensively detail the clinical commissioning steps for 3D-printed materials applied as patient support or immobilization devices in photon radiotherapy. The complex nature of 3D-printed materials with application to patient-specific configurations requires careful consideration. The framework presented is generalizable to any 3D-printed object where the infill and shell combinations are unknown. METHODS: A representative cylinder and wedge were used as test objects to characterize devices that may be printed of unknown, patient-specific dimensions. A case study of a 3D-printed CSI immobilization board was presented as an example of an object of known, but adaptable dimensions and proprietary material composition. A series of measurements were performed to characterize the material's kV radiologic properties, MV attenuation measurements and calculations, energy spectrum water equivalency, and surface dose measurements. These measurements complement the recommendations of the AAPM's TG176 to characterize the additional complexity of 3D-printed materials for use in a clinical radiotherapy environment. RESULTS: The dosimetric characterization of 3D-printed test objects and a case study device informed the development of a step-by-step template that can easily be followed by clinicians to accurately and safely utilize 3D-printed materials as patient-specific support or immobilization devices. CONCLUSIONS: A series of steps is outlined to provide a formulaic approach to clinically commission 3D-printed materials that may possess varying material composition, infill patterns, and patient-specific dimensions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207