133 292

Cited 0 times in

Cited 11 times in

An investigation into the risk of population bias in deep learning autocontouring

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorMcQuinlan, Yasmin-
dc.contributor.authorBrouwer, Charlotte L.-
dc.contributor.authorLin, Zhixiong-
dc.contributor.authorGan, Yong-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Jin Sung-
dc.contributor.authorvan Elmpt, Wouter-
dc.contributor.authorGooding, Mark J.-
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-22T05:44:04Z-
dc.date.available2024-03-22T05:44:04Z-
dc.date.created2024-04-03-
dc.date.issued2023-09-
dc.identifier.issn0167-8140-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/198175-
dc.description.abstractBackground and Purpose: To date, data used in the development of Deep Learning-based automatic contouring (DLC) algorithms have been largely sourced from single geographic populations. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of population-based bias by determining whether the performance of an autocontouring system is impacted by geographic population.Materials and methods: 80 Head Neck CT deidentified scans were collected from four clinics in Europe (n = 2) and Asia (n = 2). A single observer manually delineated 16 organs-at-risk in each. Subsequently, the data was contoured using a DLC solution, and trained using single institution (European) data. Autocontours were compared to manual delineations using quantitative measures. A Kruskal-Wallis test was used to test for any difference between populations. Clinical acceptability of automatic and manual contours to observers from each participating institution was assessed using a blinded subjective evaluation.Results: Seven organs showed a significant difference in volume between groups. Four organs showed statistical differences in quantitative similarity measures. The qualitative test showed greater variation in acceptance of contouring between observers than between data from different origins, with greater acceptance by the South Korean observers.Conclusion: Much of the statistical difference in quantitative performance could be explained by the difference in organ volume impacting the contour similarity measures and the small sample size. However, the qualitative assessment suggests that observer perception bias has a greater impact on the apparent clinical acceptability than quantitatively observed differences. This investigation of potential geographic bias should extend to more patients, populations, and anatomical regions in the future.& COPY; 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Radiotherapy and Oncology 186 (2023) 1-14 This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityopen-
dc.formatapplication/pdf-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherElsevier Scientific Publishers-
dc.relation.isPartOfRADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY-
dc.relation.isPartOfRADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.titleAn investigation into the risk of population bias in deep learning autocontouring-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Radiation Oncology (방사선종양학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMcQuinlan, Yasmin-
dc.contributor.googleauthorBrouwer, Charlotte L.-
dc.contributor.googleauthorLin, Zhixiong-
dc.contributor.googleauthorGan, Yong-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKim, Jin Sung-
dc.contributor.googleauthorvan Elmpt, Wouter-
dc.contributor.googleauthorGooding, Mark J.-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109747-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ02597-
dc.identifier.eissn1879-0887-
dc.identifier.pmid37330053-
dc.subject.keywordRadiotherapy-
dc.subject.keywordAutocontouring-
dc.subject.keywordSegmentation-
dc.subject.keywordOrgan-at-Risk-
dc.subject.keywordDeep learning-
dc.subject.keywordBias-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Jinsung-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Jin Sung-
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85163478008-
dc.identifier.wosid001039081500001-
dc.citation.volume186-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationRADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, Vol.186, 2023-09-
dc.identifier.rimsid82763-
dc.type.rimsART-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.description.journalClass1-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorRadiotherapy-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorAutocontouring-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorSegmentation-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorOrgan-at-Risk-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorDeep learning-
dc.subject.keywordAuthorBias-
dc.subject.keywordPlusCLINICAL TARGET VOLUME-
dc.subject.keywordPlusAUTOMATIC DELINEATION-
dc.subject.keywordPlusRADIOTHERAPY-
dc.subject.keywordPlusORGANS-
dc.subject.keywordPlusHEAD-
dc.subject.keywordPlusIMPLEMENTATION-
dc.subject.keywordPlusVALIDATION-
dc.subject.keywordPlusQUALITY-
dc.type.docTypeArticle-
dc.description.isOpenAccessY-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscie-
dc.description.journalRegisteredClassscopus-
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategoryOncology-
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategoryRadiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging-
dc.relation.journalResearchAreaOncology-
dc.relation.journalResearchAreaRadiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging-
dc.identifier.articleno109747-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiation Oncology (방사선종양학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.