MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393237057 · doi:10.2478/pjmpe-2024-0005

First implementation of quality control procedures on selected X-ray machines in South of Benin

2024· article· en· W4393237057 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tino Romeo Soglo, Stephen Inkoom, Francis Hasford, Edem Sosu, Olivier Biaou

Bibliographic record

VenuePolish Journal of Medical Physics And Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Control (management)Computer scienceMedical physicsEngineering managementMedicineEngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: The use of X-ray equipment for medical diagnostic radiography procedures has increased due to advances and complexity of radiological procedures. Achieving good image quality while keeping exposure of workers, public and patient exposure to an acceptable level has become a prerequisite for the radiology department in order to comply with best international practices. The aim of this study was to undertake quality control measurement of seven (7) diagnostic radiography equipment in the south of Benin, the first of its kind. Material and methods: Multifunction detector (Piranha) and beam alignment test tool were used to perform quality control tests on seven (7) X-ray units. The method used as well as the interpretation of the results was based on the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Healing Arts Radiation Protection (HARP), Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM), International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Canadian Safety code 35 (S.C 35) recommendations. Results: The quality control results showed that all X-ray equipment investigated were within standard limits for accuracy of exposure time below 10 ms; reproducibility of kVp, exposure time and dose output; specific dose-kVp 2 linearity; and specific dose-mAs linearity. Five (5) out of seven (7) diagnostic X-ray machines passed quality control tests such as X-ray beam alignment, exposure time above 10 ms and kVp accuracy. One (1) X-ray machine failed the quality control test of beam filtration at 70 kVp and above. Conclusions: The findings of this study have provided baseline data for other radiology departments to embark on similar QA/QC activities, and also explore options for optimization of patient dose. However, there is a need to extend the study to cover more diagnostic X-ray machines throughout the country. It is anticipated that this would ultimately assist in improving radiation protection and safety during medical diagnostic radiological procedures.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolish Journal of Medical Physics And EngineeringSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207