ArticleBiomedical physics & engineering express2024
Evaluation of artificial intelligence and optical image recognition techniques used in OneIso, an off-axis Winston-Lutz quality assurance phantom.
Article in Biomedical physics & engineering express, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Single-isocenter multitarget (SIMT) stereotactic-radiosurgery (SRS) has recently emerged as a powerful treatment regimen for intracranial tumors. With high specificity, SIMT SRS allows for rapid, high-dose delivery while maintaining integrity of adjacent healthy tissues and minimizing neurocognitive damage to patients. Highly robust and accurate quality assurance (QA) tests are critical to minimize off-targets and damage to surrounding healthy tissues. We have developed a novel QA phantom, named OneIso, to accurately and precisely measure off-axis accuracy, via off-axis Winston-Lutz (OAWL), to assist SIMT SRS programs. In this study, a comparison of three different quantitative numerical methods were performed for isolating and measuring the position of ball-bearings (BBs) used in the OAWL measurement. The three methods evaluated were: 1) feature extraction technique combined with manual intervention 2) a proprietary software utilizing optical image recognition (OIR) techniques, and 3) a machine learning (ML) model employing convolutional neural networks (CNNs). These methods were used to analyze OAWL datasets gathered from a OneIso phantom deployed on a Varian TrueBeam. The precision of localizing positional BBs within the OneIso QA phantom, analysis speed, and robustness were compared across the methods. Significantly, the trained ML model utilizing CNNs was found to exhibit superior precision, analysis speed, and efficiency compared to the other two methods. These results highlight the benefit in shifting from manual and OIR methods to that of ML techniques. The incorporation of CNNs in automated QA analysis can achieve improved precision, allowing for more rapid and wider adoption of SIMT SRS for treating intracranial metastases while preserving integrity of surrounding healthy tissues.
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.