ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
Evaluating the quality of multiple automatically produced segmentation variants of the prostate on Magnetic Resonance Imaging scans for brachytherapy.
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. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Recently, we introduced a novel Deep Learning (DL) based (semi-)automatic method for medical image segmentation. Unlike classical DL segmentation methods, it produces multiple segmentation variants (reflecting the variation of manual segmentations) instead of just one. Potentially, with this approach, there is a higher chance that a clinician prefers one of automatically produced segmentation variants. This work focuses on evaluating this method on prostate segmentation in MRI scans used for brachytherapy and investigating its potential clinical usefulness. Materials and Methods: Three experienced radiation oncologists graded (per-slice and per-scan) segmentations produced by our method, reference segmentations (manually created and used for brachytherapy treatment planning) and segmentations produced by a classical DL method. The study was retrospective and the way the segmentation was generated (our method, classical DL method, or manually) was blinded for the clinicians. The grades reflect the amount of manual correction required. Additionally, the clinicians were asked to rank segmentations to evaluate which one is preferred for each scan. The study was performed on 13 prostate cancer patients. Results: Segmentations produced by our method are graded as requiring no manual correction in 292/576 (51 %) slices compared to 240/576 (42 %) slices in the case of the segmentations produced by a classical DL method. Furthermore, in fewer slices, 38 (6.6 %) vs. 48 (8.3 %), segmentations by our method were graded as unacceptable. Conclusion: Our study has demonstrated that deep-learning-based segmentation methods can produce high-quality segmentations. Our method was evaluated better than a classical DL method, indicating the potential for integration into clinical practice.
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.