Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38515817›Full record

ArticleReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology2023

Comparison of deep learning models for building two-dimensional non-transit EPID Dosimetry on Varian Halcyon.

Muhammad Mahdi Ramadhan, Wahyu Edy Wibowo, Prawito Prajitno, Supriyanto Ardjo Pawiro

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 99% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Analysis of radiotherapy planning images using colour blindness filters.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2026
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Muhammad Mahdi RamadhanDepartment Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia.
Wahyu Edy WibowoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo General Hospital, Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Prawito PrajitnoDepartment Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia.
Supriyanto Ardjo PawiroDepartment Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia.
University of Indonesia · ID

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study compared the effectiveness of five deep learning models in constructing non-transit dosimetry with an a-Si electronic portal imaging device (EPID) on Varian Halcyon. Deep learning model is increasingly used to support prediction and decision-making in several fields including oncology and radiotherapy. Materials and methods: Forty-seven unique plans of data obtained from breast cancer patients were calculated using Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) and extracted from DICOM format as the ground truth. Varian Halcyon was then used to irradiate the a-Si 1200 EPID detector without an attenuator. The EPID and TPS images were augmented and divided randomly into two groups of equal sizes to distinguish the validation and training-test data. Five different deep learning models were then created and validated using a gamma index of 3%/3 mm. Results: Four models successfully improved the similarity of the EPID images and the TPS-generated planned dose images. Meanwhile, the mismatch of the constituent components and number of parameters could cause the models to produce wrong results. The average gamma pass rates were 90.07 ± 4.96% for A-model, 77.42 ± 7.18% for B-model, 79.60 ± 6.56% for C-model, 80.21 ± 5.88% for D-model, and 80.47 ± 5.98% for E-model. Conclusion: The deep learning model is proven to run fast and can increase the similarity of EPID images with TPS images to build non-transit dosimetry. However, more cases are needed to validate this model before being used in clinical activities.

Indexed as

Cine imagesdeep learningdosimetryEPIDradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID38515817
PMCPMC10954275
OpenAlexW4391031662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.