MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403361862 · doi:10.1002/acm2.14541

Characterization of novel 3D‐printed metal shielding for brachytherapy applicators

2024· article· en· W4403361862 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn M. McGrath, Krista Chytyk‐Praznik, Amanda Cherpak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Cancer CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceImaging phantomBrachytherapyElectromagnetic shieldingTransverse planeNuclear medicineBiomedical engineeringComposite materialMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To characterize 3D-printed stainless steel metal samples in the presence of an Iridium-192 source for organ-at-risk sparing in gynecologic brachytherapy. METHODS: , thickness range 1-5 mm) were embedded in a solid water phantom at varying distances from source catheters. An Ir-192 brachytherapy source was passed through the phantom and the dose was measured using EBT3 Gafchromic film. The film was initially positioned in the sagittal plane 2 cm away from the catheters, with the metal directly below and then 1 cm from the film. A uniform dose was delivered at the film plane. A second setup measured a depth dose curve in solid water with film in the transverse plane directly above the metal samples. This setup was recreated using Monte Carlo simulations (EGSnrc egs_brachy). Validation between methods was performed with unshielded (solid water only) measurements. RESULTS: The planar dose passing through the metal samples (thickness 1-5 mm) at the midpoint between the film and catheters, decreased compared to solid water by 7.4% ± 6.9% to 26.5% ± 5.5%. Dose enhancement on the order of 5% was noted when metal was directly adjacent to the film. The average decrease in depth dose from a single dwell position ranged from 10.0% ± 5.9% (1 mm) to 21.1% ± 5.3% (5 mm) as measured with film, and from 3.8% ± 0.9% (1 mm) to 16.3% ± 0.9% (5 mm) using MC simulation. The average depth dose values were measured using a line width of 2.5 mm for film, and 3 mm for MC simulation, and the measurements generally agree within standard error. CONCLUSIONS: The 3D-printed metal samples show potential for personalized applicators. Maximum dose reduction of 26.5% ± 5.5% compared to solid water was measured at 2 cm from the source using the 5 mm sample. An outer layer of solid water could potentially be used to reduce dose enhancement due to increased scatter near the metal.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Clinical Medical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207