MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899551038 · doi:10.2967/jnmt.118.218131

Technologist Approach to Global Dose Optimization

2018· article· en· W2899551038 on OpenAlexaff
Pedro Fragoso Costa, Giorgio Testanera, Luca Camoni, Christelle Terwinghe, Elizabeth Bailey, Norman E. Bolus, Tina Alden

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Medicine Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear medicineMedical physicsComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nuclear medicine technologists are specialized health professionals who cover a wide range of tasks from clinical routine (including image acquisition and processing, radiopharmaceutical dispensing and administration, patient care, and radioprotection tasks) to leading clinical research in the field of nuclear medicine. As a fundamental concern in all radiation sciences applied to medicine, protection of individuals against the harmful effects of ionizing radiation must be constantly revised and applied by the professionals involved in medical exposures. The acknowledgment that nuclear medicine technologists play a prominent role in patient management and several procedural steps, both in diagnostic and in therapeutic nuclear medicine applications, carries the duty to be trained and knowledgeable on the topic of radiation protection and dose optimization. An overview on selected topics related to dose optimization is presented in this article, reflecting the similarities and particularities of dose reduction-related principles, initiatives, and practicalities from a global perspective.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.313 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Medicine TechnologySame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207