MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023757275 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab9159

Roadmap for metal nanoparticles in radiation therapy: current status, translational challenges, and future directions

2020· review· en· W3023757275 on OpenAlexafffund
Jan Schuemann, Alexander F. Bagley, Ross Berbeco, Kyle Bromma, Karl T. Butterworth, Hilary L. Byrne, Devika B. Chithrani, Sang Hyun Cho, Jason Cook, Vincent Favaudon, Yaser H. Gholami, E. Gargioni, James F. Hainfeld, F. Hespeels, Anne‐Catherine Heuskin, Udoka Ibeh, Zdenka Kuncic, Sijumon Kunjachan, S. Lacombe, Stéphane Lucas, François Lux, Stephen J. McMahon, Dmitry Nevozhay, Wilfred Ngwa, J. Donald Payne, Sébastien Penninckx, Erika Porcel, Kevin M. Prise, Hans Rabus, Sharif M. Ridwan, Benedikt Rudek, Léon Sanche, Bijay Singh, Henry M. Smilowitz, Konstantin Sokolov, Srinivas Sridhar, Ya. M. Stanishevskiy, Wonmo Sung, Olivier Tillement, Needa Virani, Wassana Yantasee, Sunil Krishnan

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of Victoria
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean CommissionNIH Clinical CenterNational Institutes of HealthCancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas
KeywordsNanotechnologyRadiation therapyMedical physicsMedicineMaterials scienceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This roadmap outlines the potential roles of metallic nanoparticles (MNPs) in the field of radiation therapy. MNPs made up of a wide range of materials (from Titanium, Z = 22, to Bismuth, Z = 83) and a similarly wide spectrum of potential clinical applications, including diagnostic, therapeutic (radiation dose enhancers, hyperthermia inducers, drug delivery vehicles, vaccine adjuvants, photosensitizers, enhancers of immunotherapy) and theranostic (combining both diagnostic and therapeutic), are being fabricated and evaluated. This roadmap covers contributions from experts in these topics summarizing their view of the current status and challenges, as well as expected advancements in technology to address these challenges.

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)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.147 · 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

Citations154
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207