ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2026
Auto-segmentation of organs-of-interest clinical acceptability & reproducibility framework in head and neck cancer.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Auto-segmentation of organs-of-interest (OOI) in cancer patients is essential for facilitating radiotherapy planning and reducing inter-observer variability. Deep learning-based auto-segmentation models have shown promise, but limited transparency and reproducibility hinder their generalizability and clinical acceptability, limiting their use in clinical settings. Materials and methods: We introduced an auto-Segmentation Clinical Acceptability & Reproducibility Framework, a comprehensive framework designed to benchmark open-source deep learning models for auto-segmentation of 19 essential OOIs in head and neck cancer (HNC). Reproducibility was achieved through harmonized data curation, standardized model training (training/tune/test of 479/44/59) and assessment workflows. New models can be benchmarked against 12 pre-trained open-source deep learning models, while estimating clinical acceptability using a 5-point Likert scale. Results: The framework codebase is openly available for benchmarking OOI auto-segmentation methods. During development, expert assessment of the best performing model labelled 16/19 AI-generated OOI categories as clinically acceptable with only minor revisions. Conclusions: The framework facilitates benchmarking and expert assessment of AI-driven auto-segmentation tools, addressing the need for transparency and reproducibility in this domain. Through its emphasis on clinical acceptability, our framework fosters the integration of AI models into clinical environments, specifically within radiation therapy.
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.