Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34670137›Full record

ReviewPractical radiation oncology

Automated Plan Checking Software Demonstrates Continuous and Sustained Improvements in Safety and Quality: A 3-year Longitudinal Analysis.

Delaney Stuhr, Ying Zhou, Hai Pham, Jian-Ping Xiong, Shi Liu, James G Mechalakos, Sean L Berry

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Practical radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Delaney StuhrDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Ying ZhouDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Hai PhamDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Jian-Ping XiongDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Shi LiuDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
James G MechalakosDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Sean L BerryDepartment of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. Electronic address: BerryS@MSKCC.org.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Elisa de Stanchina · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to perform a longitudinal analysis of the performance of our automated plan checking software by retrospectively evaluating the number of errors identified in plans delivered to patients in 3, month-long, data collection periods between 2017 and 2020. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eleven automated checks were retrospectively run on 1169 external beam radiation therapy treatment plans identified as meeting the following criteria: planning target volume-based multifield photon plans receiving a status of treatment approved in March 2017, March 2018, or March 2020. The number of passes (true positives) and flags were recorded. Flags were subcategorized into false negatives, false negatives due to naming conventions, and true negatives. In addition, 2 × 2 contingency tables using a 2-tailed Fisher's exact test were used to determine whether there were nonrandom associations between the output of the automated plan checking software and whether the check was manual or automated at the original time of treatment approval.

resultsA statistically significant decrease in flags between the pre- and postautomation data sets was observed for 4 contour-based checks, namely adjacent structures overlap, empty structures and missing slices, overlap between body and couch, and laterality, as well as a check that determined whether the plan's global maximum dose was within the planning target volume. A review of the origins of false negatives was fed back into the design of the checks to improve the reliability of the system and help avoid warning fatigue.

conclusionsPeriodic and longitudinal review of the performance of automated software was essential for monitoring and understanding its impact on error rates, as well as for optimization of the tool to adapt to regular changes of clinical practice. The automated plan checking software has demonstrated continuous contributions to the safe and effective delivery of external beam radiation therapy to our patient population, an impact that extends beyond its initial implementation and deployment.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedHumansRadiotherapy DosageReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSoftware

Identifiers

PMID34670137
PMCPMC8901531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.