ReviewBJR artificial intelligence2024
Clinical adoption of deep learning target auto-segmentation for radiation therapy: challenges, clinical risks, and mitigation strategies.
Review in BJR artificial intelligence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Dnq-unet: a two-level fusion framework for few-shot domain adaptation in cervical cancer CTV segmentation.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence applications in adaptive radiotherapy-a narrative review.Translational cancer research · 2026Review
- AI driven interactive extraction of tomographic ultrasound imaging sequences for anal sphincter defects.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Clinical validation of AI-assisted contouring in prostate radiation therapy treatment planning: Highlighting automation bias and the need for standardized quality assurance.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Geometric, dosimetric and psychometric evaluation of three commercial AI software solutions for OAR auto-segmentation in head and neck radiotherapy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Leveraging network uncertainty to identify regions in rectal cancer clinical target volume auto-segmentations likely requiring manual edits.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Automated Audit and Self-Correction Algorithm for Seg-Hallucination Using MeshCNN-Based On-Demand Generative AI.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiation therapy is a localized cancer treatment that relies on precise delineation of the target to be treated and healthy tissues to guarantee optimal treatment effect. This step, known as contouring or segmentation, involves identifying both target volumes and organs at risk on imaging modalities like CT, PET, and MRI to guide radiation delivery. Manual segmentation, however, is time-consuming and highly subjective, despite the presence of contouring guidelines. In recent years, automated segmentation methods, particularly deep learning models, have shown promise in addressing this task. However, challenges persist in their clinical use, including the need for robust quality assurance (QA) processes and addressing clinical risks associated with the use of the models. This review examines the challenges and considerations of the clinical adoption of deep learning target auto-segmentation in radiotherapy, focused on the target volume. We discuss potential clinical risks (eg, over- and under-segmentation, automation bias, and appropriate trust), mitigation strategies (eg, human oversight, uncertainty quantification, and education of clinical professionals), and we highlight the importance of expanding QA to include geometric, dose-volume, and outcome-based performance monitoring. While deep learning target auto-segmentation offers significant potential benefits, careful attention to clinical risks and rigorous QA measures are essential for its successful integration in 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.