ArticleJournal of medical physics
Efficient and Reliable Data Extraction in Radiation Oncology using Python Programming Language: A Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of medical physics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-time data in cancer registries: Validation of an automated data extraction system.iScience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: In recent years, data science approaches have entered health-care systems such as radiology, pathology, and radiation oncology. In our pilot study, we developed an automated data mining approach to extract data from a treatment planning system (TPS) with high speed, maximum accuracy, and little human interaction. We compared the amount of time required for manual data extraction versus the automated data mining technique. Materials and Methods: A Python programming script was created to extract specified parameters and features pertaining to patients and treatment (a total of 25 features) from TPS. We successfully implemented automation in data mining, utilizing the application programming interface environment provided by the external beam radiation therapy equipment provider for the whole group of patients who were accepted for treatment. Results: This in-house Python-based script extracted selected features for 427 patients in 0.28 ± 0.03 min with 100% accuracy at an astonishing rate of 0.04 s/plan. Comparatively, manual extraction of 25 parameters took an average of 4.5 ± 0.33 min/plan, along with associated transcriptional and transpositional errors and missing data information. This new approach turned out to be 6850 times faster than the conventional approach. Manual feature extraction time increased by a factor of nearly 2.5 if we doubled the number of features extracted, whereas for the Python script, it increased by a factor of just 1.15. Conclusion: We conclude that our in-house developed Python script can extract plan data from TPS at a far higher speed (>6000 times) and with the best possible accuracy compared to manual data extraction.
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.