MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390667577 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncad315

Reconstruction of organ doses for patients undergoing computed tomography examinations in Canada 1992–2019

2024· article· en· W4390667577 on OpenAlexaffabout
Choonsik Lee, Brian Moroz, Christopher Thome, Katherine Gaudreau, Pirouz Emami, Mark P. Little

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversityMcMaster UniversityLaurentian University
FundersDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer InstituteNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsComputed tomographyMedicineNuclear medicineTomographyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We derived the first comprehensive organ dose library for Canadian pediatric and adult patients who underwent computed tomography (CT) scans between 1992 and 2019 to support epidemiological analysis of radiation risk. We calculated organ absorbed doses for Canadian CT patients in two steps. First, we modeled Computed Tomography Dose Index (CTDI) values by patient age, scan body part, and scan year for the scan period between 1992 and 2019 using national survey data conducted in Canada and partially the United Kingdom survey data as surrogates. Second, we converted CTDI values to organ absorbed doses using a library of organ dose conversion coefficients built in an organ dose calculation program, the National Cancer Institute dosimetry system for CT. In result, we created a library of doses delivered to 33 organs and tissues by different patient ages and genders, scan body parts and scan years. In the scan period before 2000, the organs receiving the greatest dose in the head, chest and abdomen-pelvis scans were the active marrow (3.7-15.2 mGy), lungs (54.7-62.8 mGy) and colon (54.9-68.5 mGy), respectively. We observed organ doses reduced by 24% (pediatric head and torso scans, and adult head scans) and 55% (adult torso scans) after 2000. The organ dose library will be used to analyse the risk of radiation exposure from CT scans in the Canadian CT patient cohort.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation Protection DosimetrySame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207