ArticleThe British journal of radiology2017
The role of delineation education programs for improving interobserver variability in target volume delineation in gastric cancer.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inter-Observer variability in organs at risk contouring among radiation therapy students and qualified radiation therapists.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Target Contour Consistency During Magnetic Resonance-Guided Online Adaptive Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy.Advances in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Contouring aid tools in radiotherapy. Smoothing: the false friend.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Article
- Imaging for Target Delineation and Treatment Planning in Radiation Oncology: Current and Emerging Techniques.Hematology/oncology clinics of North America · 2019Review
- Interobserver Variations in Target Delineation in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma and its Impact on Target Dose Coverage.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess whether delineation courses for radiation oncologists improve interobserver variability in target volume delineation for post-operative gastric cancer radiotherapy planning.
methods29 radiation oncologists delineated target volumes in a gastric cancer patient. An experienced radiation oncologist lectured about delineation based on contouring atlas and delineation recommendations. After the course, the radiation oncologists, blinded to the previous delineation, provided delineation for the same patient.
resultsThe difference between delineated volumes and reference volumes for pre- and post-course clinical target volume (CTV) were 19.8% (-42.4 to 70.6%) and 12.3% (-12.0 to 27.3%) (p = 0.26), respectively. The planning target volume (PTV) differences pre- and post-course according to the reference volume were 20.5% (-40.7 to 93.7%) and 13.1% (-10.6 to 29.5%) (p = 0.30), respectively. The concordance volumes between the pre- and post-course CTVs and PTVs were 467.1 ± 89.2 vs 597.7 ± 54.6 cm
conclusionThe delineation course improved interobserver variability for gastric cancer. However, impact of target volume changes on toxicity and local control should be evaluated for further studies. Advances in knowledge: This study demonstrated that a delineation course based on current recommendations helped physicians delineate smaller and more homogeneous target volumes. Better target volume delineation allows proper target volume irradiation and preventing unnecessary normal tissue irradiation.
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.