ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Statistical process control for performance monitoring and continuous quality assurance of deep learning segmentations 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.
- Automated deep learning segmentation and planning for left-sided breast radiotherapy with minimised adaptations based on dose, TCP and NTCP criteria.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
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
Background and purpose: After clinical implementation of deep learning segmentation (DLS) models it is highly recommended to perform routine quality assurance (QA). Through forthcoming regulations of the EU AI Act state that the output of any DLS model needs to be logged, enabling continuous QA (CQA) to monitor DLS performance and introduce alarms. Therefore, the goal was to implement a CQA framework for DLS in radiotherapy. Materials and methods: The direct output of the DLS models and the clinically approved delineations (CS) were automatically exported, after which geometric metrics were calculated. For each combination between a region of interest (ROI) and metric, a target, lower and upper control limit were determined, based on statistical process control (SPC). Adapted versions of the first three Nelson rules were used for outlier identification and detection of trend shifts and drifts. Results: In the first six months, 545 DLS and corresponding CS RT structure files were logged containing 3093 ROIs. From these ROIs, 3.0 % was automatically reported as outlier. Data from 5 patients, which anatomy was deemed interesting, was saved for potential model re-training. Four trend shifts identified a performance drop for the humerus due to unexpected changes. Twelve other trend shifts and one trend drift were detected, causing only temporary deviations. Conclusions: A CQA framework for DLS was successfully implemented using SPC and adapted Nelson rules to automatically report outliers and trend shifts, which led to automatic detection of such deviations.
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.