ArticleAnnals of biomedical research2023
A Deep-Learning Error Detection System in Radiation Therapy.
Article in Annals of biomedical research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Delivering radiation therapy based on erroneous or corrupted treatment plan data has previously and unfortunately resulted in severe, sometimes grave patient harm. Aiming to prevent such harm and improve safety in radiation therapy treatment, this work introduces a novel, yet intuitive algorithm for strategically structuring the complex and unstructured data typical of modern treatment plans so their treatment sites may automatically be verified with deep-learning architectures. The proposed algorithm utilizes geometric and dose plan parameters to represent each plan's data as a heat map to feed a deep-learning classifier that will predict the plan's treatment site. Once it is returned by the classifier, a plan's predicted site can be compared to its documented intended site, and a warning raised should the two differ. Using real head-neck, breast, and prostate treatment plan data retrieved at two hospitals in the United States, the algorithm is evaluated by observing the accuracy of convolutional neural networks (ConvNets) in correctly classifying the structured heat map data. Many well-known ConvNet architectures are tested, and ResNet-18 performs the best with a testing accuracy of 97.8% and 0.979 F-1 score. Clearly, the heat maps generated by the proposed algorithm, despite using only a few of the many available plan parameters, retain enough information for correct treatment site classification. The simple construction and ease of interpretation make the heat maps an attractive choice for classification and error detection.
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.