ArticleMedical physics2022
Technical note: Determining the applicability of a clinical knowledge-based learning model via prospective outlier detection.
Article in Medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Deep learning-based dose prediction to improve the plan quality of volumetric modulated arc therapy for gynecologic cancers.Medical physics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundKnowledge-based planning (KBP) is increasingly implemented clinically because of its demonstrated ability to improve treatment planning efficiency and reduce plan quality variations. However, cases with large dose-volume histogram (DVH) prediction uncertainties may still need manual adjustments by the planner to achieve high plan quality. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to develop a data-driven method to detect patients with high prediction uncertainties so that intentional effort is directed to these patients.
methodsWe apply an anomaly detection method known as the local outlier factor (LOF) to a dataset consisting of the training set and each of the prospective patients considered, to evaluate their likelihood of being an anomaly when compared with the training cases. Features used in the LOF analysis include anatomical features and the model-generated DVH principal component scores. To test the efficacy of the proposed model, 142 prostate patients were retrieved from the clinical database and split into a training dataset of 100 patients and a test dataset of 42 patients. The outlier identification performance was quantified by the difference between the DVH prediction root-mean-squared errors (RMSE) of the identified outlier cases and that of the remaining inlier cases.
resultsWith a predefined LOF threshold of 1.4, the inlier cases achieved average RMSEs of 5.0 and 6.7 for bladder and rectum, while the outlier cases have substantially higher RMSEs of 6.7 and 13.0 in comparison.
conclusionsWe propose a method that can determine the prospective patient's outlier status. This method can be integrated into existing automated treatment planning workflows to reduce the risk of generating suboptimal treatment plans while providing an upfront alert to the treatment planner.
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.