MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046771012 · doi:10.21037/apm-20-856

Radiotherapy to the brain: what are the consequences of this age-old treatment?

2020· review· en· W3046771012 on OpenAlexaff
Caryn Wujanto, Balamurugan Vellayappan, Eric L. Chang, Samuel T. Chao, Arjun Sahgal, Simon S. Lo

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Palliative Medicine · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiosurgeryRadiation therapyMemantineAdverse effectQuality of life (healthcare)Cognitive declineTimelineIntensive care medicineSurgeryDementiaInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiotherapy (RT) has been widely used in the management of benign and malignant brain tumors for decades. However, complications can develop as a result of adjacent structures being exposed to radiation. As such, careful selection of patients and deciding on the most suitable modality of RT are crucial to minimize complications. In general, complications can be subdivided based on its timeline of onset; acute (few days to weeks), early delayed (1-6 months) and late (>6 months). Late complications such as cognitive decline and radiation necrosis can be debilitating and negatively impacts quality-of-life. New strategies to reduce RT-related complications such as with hippocampal sparing-WBRT, memantine, and focal RT (e.g., stereotactic radiosurgery) have had promising results and are being adopted in clinical practice. This review will focus on RT-related complications in the brain, with a focus on WBRT or SRS-related late adverse events, as well as measures to mitigate these complications.

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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.272
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Palliative MedicineSame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207