The Experts below are selected from a list of 245625 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ioannis Sechopoulos - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
records improved reporting of monte carlo radiation transport studies report of the aapm Research Committee task group 268
Medical Physics, 2018Co-Authors: Ioannis Sechopoulos, D Rogers, Magdalena Bazalovacarter, Wesley E Bolch, E Heath, Michael F Mcnittgray, J Sempau, Jeffrey F WilliamsonAbstract:Studies involving Monte Carlo simulations are common in both diagnostic and therapy medical physics Research, as well as other fields of basic and applied science. As with all experimental studies, the conditions and parameters used for Monte Carlo simulations impact their scope, validity, limitations, and generalizability. Unfortunately, many published peer-reviewed articles involving Monte Carlo simulations do not provide the level of detail needed for the reader to be able to properly assess the quality of the simulations. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group #268 developed guidelines to improve reporting of Monte Carlo studies in medical physics Research. By following these guidelines, manuscripts submitted for peer-review will include a level of relevant detail that will increase the transparency, the ability to reproduce results, and the overall scientific value of these studies. The guidelines include a checklist of the items that should be included in the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections of manuscripts submitted for peer-review. These guidelines do not attempt to replace the journal reviewer, but rather to be a tool during the writing and review process. Given the varied nature of Monte Carlo studies, it is up to the authors and the reviewers to use this checklist appropriately, being conscious of how the different items apply to each particular scenario. It is envisioned that this list will be useful both for authors and for reviewers, to help ensure the adequate description of Monte Carlo studies in the medical physics literature.
-
monte carlo reference data sets for imaging Research executive summary of the report of aapm Research Committee task group 195
Medical Physics, 2015Co-Authors: Ioannis Sechopoulos, Michael F Mcnittgray, E S M Ali, Andreu Badal, Aldo Badano, John M Boone, Iacovos S Kyprianou, Ernesto Mainegrahing, Kyle Mcmillan, D W O RogersAbstract:The use of Monte Carlo simulations in diagnostic medical imaging Research is widespread due to its flexibility and ability to estimate quantities that are challenging to measure empirically. However, any new Monte Carlo simulation code needs to be validated before it can be used reliably. The type and degree of validation required depends on the goals of the Research project, but, typically, such validation involves either comparison of simulation results to physical measurements or to previously published results obtained with established Monte Carlo codes. The former is complicated due to nuances of experimental conditions and uncertainty, while the latter is challenging due to typical graphical presentation and lack of simulation details in previous publications. In addition, entering the field of Monte Carlo simulations in general involves a steep learning curve. It is not a simple task to learn how to program and interpret a Monte Carlo simulation, even when using one of the publicly available code packages. This Task Group report provides a common reference for benchmarking Monte Carlo simulations across a range of Monte Carlo codes and simulation scenarios. In the report, all simulation conditions are provided for six different Monte Carlo simulation cases that involve common x-ray based imaging Research areas. The results obtained for the six cases using four publicly available Monte Carlo software packages are included in tabular form. In addition to a full description of all simulation conditions and results, a discussion and comparison of results among the Monte Carlo packages and the lessons learned during the compilation of these results are included. This abridged version of the report includes only an introductory description of the six cases and a brief example of the results of one of the cases. This work provides an investigator the necessary information to benchmark his/her Monte Carlo simulation software against the reference cases included here before performing his/her own novel Research. In addition, an investigator entering the field of Monte Carlo simulations can use these descriptions and results as a self-teaching tool to ensure that he/she is able to perform a specific simulation correctly. Finally, educators can assign these cases as learning projects as part of course objectives or training programs.
D W O Rogers - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
monte carlo reference data sets for imaging Research executive summary of the report of aapm Research Committee task group 195
Medical Physics, 2015Co-Authors: Ioannis Sechopoulos, Michael F Mcnittgray, E S M Ali, Andreu Badal, Aldo Badano, John M Boone, Iacovos S Kyprianou, Ernesto Mainegrahing, Kyle Mcmillan, D W O RogersAbstract:The use of Monte Carlo simulations in diagnostic medical imaging Research is widespread due to its flexibility and ability to estimate quantities that are challenging to measure empirically. However, any new Monte Carlo simulation code needs to be validated before it can be used reliably. The type and degree of validation required depends on the goals of the Research project, but, typically, such validation involves either comparison of simulation results to physical measurements or to previously published results obtained with established Monte Carlo codes. The former is complicated due to nuances of experimental conditions and uncertainty, while the latter is challenging due to typical graphical presentation and lack of simulation details in previous publications. In addition, entering the field of Monte Carlo simulations in general involves a steep learning curve. It is not a simple task to learn how to program and interpret a Monte Carlo simulation, even when using one of the publicly available code packages. This Task Group report provides a common reference for benchmarking Monte Carlo simulations across a range of Monte Carlo codes and simulation scenarios. In the report, all simulation conditions are provided for six different Monte Carlo simulation cases that involve common x-ray based imaging Research areas. The results obtained for the six cases using four publicly available Monte Carlo software packages are included in tabular form. In addition to a full description of all simulation conditions and results, a discussion and comparison of results among the Monte Carlo packages and the lessons learned during the compilation of these results are included. This abridged version of the report includes only an introductory description of the six cases and a brief example of the results of one of the cases. This work provides an investigator the necessary information to benchmark his/her Monte Carlo simulation software against the reference cases included here before performing his/her own novel Research. In addition, an investigator entering the field of Monte Carlo simulations can use these descriptions and results as a self-teaching tool to ensure that he/she is able to perform a specific simulation correctly. Finally, educators can assign these cases as learning projects as part of course objectives or training programs.
Michael F Mcnittgray - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
records improved reporting of monte carlo radiation transport studies report of the aapm Research Committee task group 268
Medical Physics, 2018Co-Authors: Ioannis Sechopoulos, D Rogers, Magdalena Bazalovacarter, Wesley E Bolch, E Heath, Michael F Mcnittgray, J Sempau, Jeffrey F WilliamsonAbstract:Studies involving Monte Carlo simulations are common in both diagnostic and therapy medical physics Research, as well as other fields of basic and applied science. As with all experimental studies, the conditions and parameters used for Monte Carlo simulations impact their scope, validity, limitations, and generalizability. Unfortunately, many published peer-reviewed articles involving Monte Carlo simulations do not provide the level of detail needed for the reader to be able to properly assess the quality of the simulations. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group #268 developed guidelines to improve reporting of Monte Carlo studies in medical physics Research. By following these guidelines, manuscripts submitted for peer-review will include a level of relevant detail that will increase the transparency, the ability to reproduce results, and the overall scientific value of these studies. The guidelines include a checklist of the items that should be included in the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections of manuscripts submitted for peer-review. These guidelines do not attempt to replace the journal reviewer, but rather to be a tool during the writing and review process. Given the varied nature of Monte Carlo studies, it is up to the authors and the reviewers to use this checklist appropriately, being conscious of how the different items apply to each particular scenario. It is envisioned that this list will be useful both for authors and for reviewers, to help ensure the adequate description of Monte Carlo studies in the medical physics literature.
-
monte carlo reference data sets for imaging Research executive summary of the report of aapm Research Committee task group 195
Medical Physics, 2015Co-Authors: Ioannis Sechopoulos, Michael F Mcnittgray, E S M Ali, Andreu Badal, Aldo Badano, John M Boone, Iacovos S Kyprianou, Ernesto Mainegrahing, Kyle Mcmillan, D W O RogersAbstract:The use of Monte Carlo simulations in diagnostic medical imaging Research is widespread due to its flexibility and ability to estimate quantities that are challenging to measure empirically. However, any new Monte Carlo simulation code needs to be validated before it can be used reliably. The type and degree of validation required depends on the goals of the Research project, but, typically, such validation involves either comparison of simulation results to physical measurements or to previously published results obtained with established Monte Carlo codes. The former is complicated due to nuances of experimental conditions and uncertainty, while the latter is challenging due to typical graphical presentation and lack of simulation details in previous publications. In addition, entering the field of Monte Carlo simulations in general involves a steep learning curve. It is not a simple task to learn how to program and interpret a Monte Carlo simulation, even when using one of the publicly available code packages. This Task Group report provides a common reference for benchmarking Monte Carlo simulations across a range of Monte Carlo codes and simulation scenarios. In the report, all simulation conditions are provided for six different Monte Carlo simulation cases that involve common x-ray based imaging Research areas. The results obtained for the six cases using four publicly available Monte Carlo software packages are included in tabular form. In addition to a full description of all simulation conditions and results, a discussion and comparison of results among the Monte Carlo packages and the lessons learned during the compilation of these results are included. This abridged version of the report includes only an introductory description of the six cases and a brief example of the results of one of the cases. This work provides an investigator the necessary information to benchmark his/her Monte Carlo simulation software against the reference cases included here before performing his/her own novel Research. In addition, an investigator entering the field of Monte Carlo simulations can use these descriptions and results as a self-teaching tool to ensure that he/she is able to perform a specific simulation correctly. Finally, educators can assign these cases as learning projects as part of course objectives or training programs.
Mark Woodhead - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a national confidential enquiry into community acquired pneumonia deaths in young adults in england and wales british thoracic society Research Committee and public health laboratory service
Thorax, 2000Co-Authors: J C G Simpson, J T Macfarlane, J Watson, Mark WoodheadAbstract:BACKGROUND—The aim of this study was to describe the frequency, causal pathogens, management, and outcome of a population of young adults who died from community acquired pneumonia (CAP). METHODS—Pneumonia deaths in England and Wales in adults aged 15-44 were identified between September 1995 and August 1996. Patients with underlying chronic illness including HIV infection were excluded. Clinical details for each case were collected from the hospital and general practitioner records. RESULTS—Death from CAP was identified in 27 previously well young adults (1.2 per million population per year). Twenty were known to have consulted a GP for this illness. Nine received antibiotics before hospital admission. A causative pathogen was identified in 17 cases (Streptococcus pneumoniae in eight). Bacteraemia was present in seven. All patients who reached a hospital ward received antibiotics (69% within two hours of admission). The British Thoracic Society antibiotic guidelines for severe CAP were followed in only 10 cases. Cardiac arrest at home or on arrival at hospital occurred in six cases, one of whom was successfully resuscitated. Of the remaining 21 patients, 71% had two or more markers of severe CAP. All 22 who were admitted reached an intensive care unit, but 11 of these required transfer to another hospital for some aspect of intensive care. One third of patients died within 24hours of presenting to the hospital. CONCLUSIONS—Death from CAP in previously fit young adults still occurs. While some deaths might be preventable by better patient management, most are unlikely to be preventable by current management practices.
Jeffrey F Williamson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
records improved reporting of monte carlo radiation transport studies report of the aapm Research Committee task group 268
Medical Physics, 2018Co-Authors: Ioannis Sechopoulos, D Rogers, Magdalena Bazalovacarter, Wesley E Bolch, E Heath, Michael F Mcnittgray, J Sempau, Jeffrey F WilliamsonAbstract:Studies involving Monte Carlo simulations are common in both diagnostic and therapy medical physics Research, as well as other fields of basic and applied science. As with all experimental studies, the conditions and parameters used for Monte Carlo simulations impact their scope, validity, limitations, and generalizability. Unfortunately, many published peer-reviewed articles involving Monte Carlo simulations do not provide the level of detail needed for the reader to be able to properly assess the quality of the simulations. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group #268 developed guidelines to improve reporting of Monte Carlo studies in medical physics Research. By following these guidelines, manuscripts submitted for peer-review will include a level of relevant detail that will increase the transparency, the ability to reproduce results, and the overall scientific value of these studies. The guidelines include a checklist of the items that should be included in the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections of manuscripts submitted for peer-review. These guidelines do not attempt to replace the journal reviewer, but rather to be a tool during the writing and review process. Given the varied nature of Monte Carlo studies, it is up to the authors and the reviewers to use this checklist appropriately, being conscious of how the different items apply to each particular scenario. It is envisioned that this list will be useful both for authors and for reviewers, to help ensure the adequate description of Monte Carlo studies in the medical physics literature.
