ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
The impact of neck tilt on the accuracy of deep learning generated contours for CT images of the head and neck.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. 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.
- Beyond Couch Correction in Head and Neck Radiotherapy: A Narrative Review of Action-Oriented Positioning Management.Cancers · 2026Review
- The impact of neck tilt on the accuracy of deep learning generated contours for CT images of the head and neck.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeep learning auto segmentation (DLAS) tools are widely used for radiation therapy planning, yet limited information exists on how patient positioning impacts their performance, particularly in head and neck (HN) computed tomography (CT) imaging. PURPOSE: This study investigates the impact of abnormal neck tilt on the accuracy of DLAS-generated contours in HN CT scans. We hypothesize that abnormal positioning degrades auto segmentation performance, particularly for organs at risk (OARs) influenced by cervical spine orientation.
methodsA total of 35 HN CT scans were retrospectively analyzed. Neck tilt was quantified using principal component analysis of the spinal cord contours from C1 to C4, with patients stratified into normal and abnormal tilt groups based on percentile thresholds. Seven FDA-cleared DLAS tools were evaluated for OAR segmentation accuracy across brainstem, parotid glands, submandibular glands, brachial plexus, and optic nerves. Gold-standard contours were curated from manually created clinical contours and compared to DLAS output using Sorenson's volumetric dice similarity coefficient (DSC), surface Dice similarity coefficient with a 2 mm threshold (sDSC), mean distance to agreement (MDA) and difference in mean dose. Statistical differences were assessed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests (p < 0.05).
resultsAmong the evaluated OARs, the parotid glands showed consistent and statistically significant degradation in contouring accuracy for patients with abnormal neck tilt across all metrics (DSC, sDSC, MDA) and across all seven DLAS tools. Changes in contouring accuracy resulted in significant differences in both absolute and signed difference in mean dose. No consistent differences were observed for other structures across multiple DLAS tools.
conclusionsAbnormal neck tilt is associated with reduced DLAS accuracy and greater dose variability for parotid gland segmentation in HN radiotherapy planning. These findings underscore the need for enhanced patient quality assurance strategies for patients with abnormal positioning when using clinical DLAS workflows. Future work should explore automated detection of anatomical outliers and site-specific model retraining to ensure accurate contouring delineation for patients with atypical positioning or anatomy.
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.