ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
Comparing multi-image and image augmentation strategies for deep learning-based prostate segmentation.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2024. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During MR-Linac-based adaptive radiotherapy, multiple images are acquired per patient. These can be applied in training deep learning networks to reduce annotation efforts. This study examined the advantage of using multiple versus single images for prostate treatment segmentation. Findings indicate minimal improvement in DICE and Hausdorff 95% metrics with multiple images. Maximum difference was seen for the rectum in the low data regime, training with images from five patients. Utilizing a 2D U-net resulted in DICE values of 0.80/0.83 when including 1/5 images per patient, respectively. Including more patients in training reduced the difference. Standard augmentation methods remained more effective.
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.