↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Automated Atlas-Based Segmentation Software for Postoperative Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of Automated Atlas-Based Segmentation Software for Postoperative Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2016.00178
Pubmed ID
Authors

Grégory Delpon, Alexandre Escande, Timothée Ruef, Julien Darréon, Jimmy Fontaine, Caroline Noblet, Stéphane Supiot, Thomas Lacornerie, David Pasquier

Abstract

Automated atlas-based segmentation (ABS) algorithms present the potential to reduce the variability in volume delineation. Several vendors offer software that are mainly used for cranial, head and neck, and prostate cases. The present study will compare the contours produced by a radiation oncologist to the contours computed by different automated ABS algorithms for prostate bed cases, including femoral heads, bladder, and rectum. Contour comparison was evaluated by different metrics such as volume ratio, Dice coefficient, and Hausdorff distance. Results depended on the volume of interest showed some discrepancies between the different software. Automatic contours could be a good starting point for the delineation of organs since efficient editing tools are provided by different vendors. It should become an important help in the next few years for organ at risk delineation.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 89 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 20 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Physics and Astronomy 9 10%
Computer Science 7 8%
Engineering 6 7%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 30 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,313
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#300,353
of 381,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#33
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 381,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.