ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
Large-scale dose evaluation of deep learning organ contours in head-and-neck radiotherapy by leveraging existing plans.
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. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Statistical process control for performance monitoring and continuous quality assurance of deep learning segmentations in radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Geometric, dosimetric and psychometric evaluation of three commercial AI software solutions for OAR auto-segmentation in head and neck radiotherapy.Scientific reports · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Retrospective dose evaluation for organ-at-risk auto-contours has previously used small cohorts due to additional manual effort required for treatment planning on auto-contours. We aimed to do this at large scale, by a) proposing and assessing an automated plan optimization workflow that used existing clinical plan parameters and b) using it for head-and-neck auto-contour dose evaluation. Materials and methods: Our automated workflow emulated our clinic's treatment planning protocol and reused existing clinical plan optimization parameters. This workflow recreated the original clinical plan ( Results: For plan recreation ( Conclusions: The plan replication capability of our automated program provides a blueprint for other clinics to perform auto-contour dose evaluation with large patient cohorts. Finally, despite geometric differences, auto-contours had a minimal median dose impact, hence inspiring confidence in their utility and facilitating their clinical adoption.
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.