MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177518039 · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.07.003

Patterns of Care, Tolerability, and Safety of the First Cohort of Patients Treated on a Novel High-Field MR-Linac Within the MOMENTUM Study: Initial Results From a Prospective Multi-Institutional Registry

2021· article· en· W3177518039 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie R. de Mol van Otterloo, John P. Christodouleas, Erwin L. A. Blezer, Hafid Akhiat, Kevin Brown, Ananya Choudhury, Dave Eggert, Bradley A. Erickson, Lois A. Daamen, Corinne Faivre‐Finn, Clifton D. Fuller, Joel Goldwein, S. Hafeez, Emma Hall, Kevin J. Harrington, Uulke A. van der Heide, Robert Huddart, Martijn Intven, Anna M. Kirby, Susan Lalondrelle, Claire McCann, Bruce D. Minsky, Stella Mook, Marlies E. Nowee, Uwe Oelfke, Kristina M. Orrling, M.E.P. Philippens, Arjun Sahgal, Christopher J. Schultz, Robbert J.H.A. Tersteeg, Rob H.N. Tijssen, Alison Tree, Baukelien van Triest, Chia‐Lin Tseng, William A. Hall, Helena M. Verkooijen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAccurayRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation TrustNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchElektaVarian Medical SystemsNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCancer Research UKNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTolerabilityMedicineCommon Terminology Criteria for Adverse EventsMagnetic resonance imagingAdverse effectProspective cohort studyRadiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations63
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207