ReviewBJR artificial intelligence2025
Understanding and leveraging uncertainties in autosegmentation for radiotherapy.
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.
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.
- Improving confidence in MRI-based auto-segmentation via uncertainty assessment.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.