ArticleThe British journal of radiology2023
Evaluation of the dataset quality in gamma passing rate predictions using machine learning methods.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveGamma passing rate (GPR) predictions using machine learning methods have been explored for treatment verification of radiotherapy plans. However, these methods presented datasets with unbalanced number of plans having different treatment conditions (heterogeneous datasets), such as anatomical sites or dose per fractions, leading to lower model interpretability and prediction performance.
methodsWe investigated the impact of the dataset composition on GPR binary classification (pass/fail) using random forest (RF), XG-boost, and neural network (NN) models. 945 plans were used to create one reference dataset (randomly assembled) and 24 customized datasets that considered four heterogeneity factors independently (anatomical region, number of arcs, dose per fraction, and treatment unit). 309 predictor features were extracted and calculated from plan parameters, modulation complexity metrics, and radiomic analysis (leave-trajectory maps, 3D dose distributions, and portal dosimetry images). The models' performances were measured using the area under the curve from the receiver operating characteristic (ROC-AUC).
resultsRadiomics features for reference models increased ROC-AUC values up to 13%, 15%, and 5% for RF, XG-Boost, and NN, respectively. The datasets with higher heterogeneous conditions presented the lower ROC-AUC values (RF: 0.72 ± 0.11, XG-Boost: 0.67 ± 0.1, NN: 0.89 ± 0.05) compared to models with less heterogeneous treatment conditions (RF: 0.88 ± 0.06, XG-Boost: 0.89 ± 0.07, NN: 0.98 ± 0.01). The ten most important features for each heterogeneity dataset group demonstrated their correlation with the treatments' physical aspects and GPR prediction.
conclusionImprovements in data generalization and model performances can be associated with datasets having similar treatment conditions. This analysis might be implemented to evaluate the dataset quality and model consistency of further ML applications in radiotherapy. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Dataset heterogeneities decrease ML model performance and reliability.
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.