ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2024
Impact of Artificial Intelligence-Based Autosegmentation of Organs at Risk in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning for automatic detection of prostatectomy in CT images of prostate cancer patients.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- AI-assisted automation will reduce the need for medical physics trainees and entry-level workforce.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Global Assessment of Megavoltage External Beam Radiation Therapy Facilities: Current Status and Projections for 2030-2050.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-assisted radiotherapy for pelvic and abdominal malignancies: assessing feasibility in the context of Africa-specific risks.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- AI in Radiation Oncology: A Comprehensive Review of Current Applications and Future Directions.Cureus · 2025Review
- Radiation therapy for cervical cancer in Uganda: a practice guideline.Ecancermedicalscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Radiation therapy (RT) processes require significant human resources and expertise, creating a barrier to rapid RT deployment in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Accurate segmentation of tumor targets and organs at risk (OARs) is crucial for optimal RT. This study assessed the impact of artificial intelligence (AI)-based autosegmentation of OARs in 2 LMICs. Methods and Materials: Ten patients, comprising 5 head and neck (HN) cancer patients and 5 prostate cancer patients, were randomly selected. Planning computed tomography images were subjected to autosegmentation using an Food and Drug Administration-approved AI software tool and manual segmentation by experienced radiation oncologists from 2 LMIC RT clinics. The control data, obtained from a large academic institution in the United States, consisted of contours obtained by an experienced radiation oncologist. The segmentation time, DICE similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance, and mean surface distance were evaluated. Results: AI significantly reduced segmentation time, averaging 2 minutes per patient, compared with 57 to 84 minutes for manual contouring in LMICs. Compared with the control data, the AI pelvic contours provided better agreement than did the LMIC manual contours (mean DSC of 0.834 vs 0.807 in LMIC1 and 0.844 vs 0.801 in LMIC2). For HN contours, AI provided better agreement for the majority of OAR contours than manual contours in LMIC1 (mean DSC: 0.823 vs 0.821) or LMIC2 (mean DSC: 0.792 vs 0.748). Neither the AI nor LMIC manual contours had good agreement with the control data (DSC < 0.600) for the optic nerves, chiasm, and cochlea. Conclusions: AI-based autosegmentation generates OAR contours of comparable quality to manual segmentation for both pelvic and HN cancer patients in LMICs, with substantial time savings.
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.