ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Auditing the clinical usage of deep-learning based organ-at-risk auto-segmentation in radiotherapy.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical Applications of Quantitative Imaging and Artificial Intelligence for Pancreatic Cance.Seminars in radiation oncology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For 18 months following clinical introduction of deep-learning auto-segmentation (DLAS), an audit of organ at risk (OAR) contour editing was performed, including 1255 patients from a single institution and the majority of tumour sites. Mean surface-Dice similarity coefficient increased from 0.87 to 0.97, the number of unedited OARs increased from 21.5 % to 40 %. The audit identified changes in editing corresponding to vendor model changes, adaption of local contouring practice and reduced editing in areas of no clinical significance. The audit allowed assessment of the level and frequency of editing and identification of outlier cases.
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.