Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40583224›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2026

Comparison of Auto-Contouring Tools for Delineation of Normal Organs at Risk in Paediatric Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy.

Isabel Cant, Jonathan Sykes, Yolanda Surjan, Rachael Beldham-Collins, Laura Murphy, John Fernandez, Alison Salkeld

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2026. 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
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.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Isabel CantCrown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-8818-2917
Jonathan SykesCrown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3823-3892
Yolanda SurjanCollege of Health Medicine and Wellbeing, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Rachael Beldham-CollinsCrown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0040-4772
Laura MurphyRadiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
John FernandezCrown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.
Alison SalkeldCrown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

Western Sydney Local Health District
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionContouring organs at risk (OARs) manually in paediatric patients undergoing cranial-spinal radiation therapy (CSI) is a time-consuming, labour-intensive task. This study aims to assess the accuracy and clinical acceptability of auto-contours produced by the Siemens DirectORGANS auto-contouring software on paediatric patients receiving CSI treatment.

methodsAuto-contours of OARs were produced using the Siemens DirectORGANS Auto-contouring Software from 20 paediatric CSI patients datasets that had previously been manually contoured by a paediatric specialist radiation therapist (RT) for plan production. Manual and auto-contours were retrospectively analysed using quantitative (Dice Similarity Coefficient, Hausdorff Distance, Mean Distance to Agreement) and qualitative (Likert ratings, Turing test) assessment techniques.

resultsAuto-contoured structures were clinically acceptable for use without edits 72.8% of the time, and manual contours were clinically acceptable for use 91.7% of the time. The liver was the only auto-contoured structure that performed better than the manual equivalent. Poor performance by the auto contouring tool was noted for structures surrounded by low contrast edges, such as the breasts, oesophagus, and brainstem, in both quantitative and qualitative assessment techniques. Brain auto-contours were deemed not suitable for clinical use.

conclusionThe clinical acceptability of many of the auto-contours favours the implementation of this auto-contouring system for clinical use. However, prior to use, all contours should be critically assessed and edited accordingly. Our study results indicate that whilst auto-contouring tools are designed for adult populations, they are suitable for use on paediatric patients when used with caution.

Indexed as

Organs at RiskRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesSoftware

Identifiers

PMID40583224
PMCPMC13121556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.