ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2019
Characterization of a new physical phantom for testing rigid and deformable image registration.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A survey on deep learning in medical image registration: New technologies, uncertainty, evaluation metrics, and beyond.Medical image analysis · 2025Review
- Creating patient-specific digital phantoms with a longitudinal atlas for evaluating deformable CT-CBCT registration in adaptive lung radiotherapy.Medical physics · 2024Article
- Dosimetric impact of deformable image registration using radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeters with a physical geometric phantom.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- Development of a physical geometric phantom for deformable image registration credentialing of radiotherapy centers for a clinical trial.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2021Article
- Performance of a deformable image registration algorithm for CT and cone beam CT using physical multi-density geometric and digital anatomic phantoms.La Radiologia medica · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the accuracy of deformable image registration on MRI with a physical phantom.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2020Article
- Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone-beam computed tomography with a physical phantom.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2019Article
- Image-Based 3D Characterization of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Deformation After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2019Article
- The Investigating Image Registration Accuracy and Contour Propagation for Adaptive Radiotherapy Purposes in Line with the Task Group No. 132 Recommendation.Journal of medical physicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to describe a new user-friendly, low-cost phantom that was developed to test the accuracy of rigid and deformable image registration (DIR) systems and to demonstrate the functional efficacy of the new phantom. The phantom was constructed out of acrylic and includes a variety of inserts that simulate different tissue shapes and properties. It can simulate deformations and location changes in patient anatomy by changing the rotations of both the phantom and the inserts. CT scans of this phantom were obtained and used to test the rigid and deformable registration accuracy of the Velocity software. Eight rotation and translation scenarios were used to test the rigid registration accuracy, and 11 deformation scenarios were used to test the DIR accuracy. The mean rotation accuracies in the X-Y (axial) and X-Z (coronal) planes were 0.50° and 0.13°, respectively. The mean translation accuracy was 1 mm in both the X and Y direction and was tested in soft tissue and bone. The DIR accuracies for soft tissue and bone were 0.93 (mean Dice similarity coefficient), 8.3 and 4.5 mm (mean Hausdouff distance), 0.95 and 0.79 mm (mean distance), and 1.13 and 1.12 (mean volume ratio) for soft tissue content (DTE oil) and bone, respectively. The new phantom has a simple design and can be constructed at a low cost. This phantom will allow DIR systems to be effectively and efficiently verified to ensure system performance.
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.