Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42064006›Full record

ReviewBJR artificial intelligence2025

Understanding and leveraging uncertainties in autosegmentation for radiotherapy.

Stine Sofia Korreman, Jintao Ren

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BJR artificial intelligence, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Stine Sofia KorremanDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Danish Center for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University, DK-8200 Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3523-382X
Jintao RenDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Danish Center for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University, DK-8200 Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1558-7196

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article examines the role of uncertainties in autosegmentation for radiotherapy, which has shown promise in improving consistency, accuracy, and efficiency over traditional manual delineation. Autosegmentation, however, introduces challenges due to uncertainties that arise from factors such as limited training data and models. A nuanced understanding of these uncertainties is essential, as they directly impact clinical decisions and patient outcomes. We explore the sources of uncertainties and how they may be quantified, highlighting the impact on different levels of the segmentation process and discussing the implications of imperfect predictions. Practical applications are proposed, such as uncertainty maps to guide manual adjustments and flagging mechanisms to support quality assurance. We finally address the limitations of these approaches, including computational burdens and risks of information overload. Meaningful uncertainty quantification in autosegmentation holds significant potential to enhance clinical workflows, build trust in artificial intelligence-based tools, and ultimately improve patient care in radiotherapy.

Indexed as

autosegmentationdeep learninginterpretabilityradiotherapyuncertainties

Identifiers

PMID42064006
PMCPMC13045711

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.