MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898356960 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aaebcf

MRI-guidance for motion management in external beam radiotherapy: current status and future challenges

2018· review· en· W2898356960 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chiara Paganelli, Brendan Whelan, M. Peroni, Paul Summers, Martin F. Fast, T. Van de Lindt, Jamie R. McClelland, Björn Eiben, Paul Keall, Antony Lomax, Marco Riboldi, G. Baroni

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStand Up To CancerNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCancer Research UKUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsRadiation therapyMagnetic resonance imagingRadiation treatment planningMedical physicsExternal beam radiotherapyMedicineModality (human–computer interaction)Computer scienceRadiologyArtificial intelligenceBrachytherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High precision conformal radiotherapy requires sophisticated imaging techniques to aid in target localisation for planning and treatment, particularly when organ motion due to respiration is involved. X-ray based imaging is a well-established standard for radiotherapy treatments. Over the last few years, the ability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to provide radiation-free images with high-resolution and superb soft tissue contrast has highlighted the potential of this imaging modality for radiotherapy treatment planning and motion management. In addition, these advantageous properties motivated several recent developments towards combined MRI radiation therapy treatment units, enabling in-room MRI-guidance and treatment adaptation. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the state-of-the-art in MRI-based image guidance for organ motion management in external beam radiotherapy. Methodological aspects of MRI for organ motion management are reviewed and their application in treatment planning, in-room guidance and adaptive radiotherapy described. Finally, a roadmap for an optimal use of MRI-guidance is highlighted and future challenges are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.150
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations124
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207