ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2013
Objective assessment of image quality VI: imaging in radiation therapy.
Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- DeepAMO: a multi-slice, multi-view anthropomorphic model observer for visual detection tasks performed on volume images.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2021Article
- Task-based image quality assessment in radiation therapy: initial characterization and demonstration with computer-simulation study.Physics in medicine and biology · 2019Article
- Objective assessment of the effects of tumor motion in radiation therapy.Medical physics · 2019Article
- Physiological random processes in precision cancer therapy.PloS one · 2018Article
- Classification and evaluation strategies of auto-segmentation approaches for PET: Report of AAPM task group No. 211.Medical physics · 2017Article
- Therapy operating characteristic curves: tools for precision chemotherapy.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2016Article
- Quantifying and Reducing Uncertainties in Cancer Therapy.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2015Article
- Task-based measures of image quality and their relation to radiation dose and patient risk.Physics in medicine and biology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Earlier work on objective assessment of image quality (OAIQ) focused largely on estimation or classification tasks in which the desired outcome of imaging is accurate diagnosis. This paper develops a general framework for assessing imaging quality on the basis of therapeutic outcomes rather than diagnostic performance. By analogy to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and their variants as used in diagnostic OAIQ, the method proposed here utilizes the therapy operating characteristic or TOC curves, which are plots of the probability of tumor control versus the probability of normal-tissue complications as the overall dose level of a radiotherapy treatment is varied. The proposed figure of merit is the area under the TOC curve, denoted AUTOC. This paper reviews an earlier exposition of the theory of TOC and AUTOC, which was specific to the assessment of image-segmentation algorithms, and extends it to other applications of imaging in external-beam radiation treatment as well as in treatment with internal radioactive sources. For each application, a methodology for computing the TOC is presented. A key difference between ROC and TOC is that the latter can be defined for a single patient rather than a population of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.