Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35493853›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2022

Evaluating principal component analysis models for representing anatomical changes in head and neck radiotherapy.

Raul Argota-Perez, Jennifer Robbins, Andrew Green, Marcel van Herk, Stine Korreman, Eliana Vásquez-Osorio

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Raul Argota-PerezDepartment of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Jennifer RobbinsThe University of Manchester, Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Andrew GreenThe University of Manchester, Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Marcel van HerkThe University of Manchester, Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Stine KorremanDepartment of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Eliana Vásquez-OsorioThe University of Manchester, Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: Anatomical changes during radiotherapy pose a challenge to robustness of plans. Principal component analysis (PCA) is commonly used to model such changes. We propose a toolbox to evaluate how closely a given PCA model can represent actual deformations seen in the patient and highlight regions where the model struggles to capture these changes. Materials and methods: We propose to calculate a residual error map from the difference between an actual displacement vector field (DVF) and the closest DVF that the PCA model can produce. This was done by taking the inner product of the DVF with the PCA components from the model. As a global measure of error, the 90th percentile of the residual errors Results: For our example cases, the oropharyngeal and the nasal cavity regions showed the largest local residual error, indicating the PCA models struggle to predict deformations seen in these regions. Conclusions: A method to quantitatively evaluate how well PCA models represent observed anatomical changes was proposed. We demonstrated our approach on H&N PCA models, but it can be applied to other sites.

Indexed as

Anatomical deformationsHead and neckPrincipal component analysisRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID35493853
PMCPMC9038571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.