Byun, Hwa KyungChang, Jee SukChoi, Min SeoChun, JaeheeJung, JinhongJeong, ChiyoungKim, Jin SungChang, YongjinChung, Seung YeunLee, SeungryulKim, Yong Bae
Additional file 1. Table S1. Summary of DSC and HD for sensitivity analyses; Table S2. Total contouring time for all organs at risk of each patient; Table S3. Time for manual contouring, according to each organ at risk; Table S4. Time for correcting autocontours, according to each organ at risk; Figure S1. (A) Dice similarity coefficient and (B) Hausdorff distance values, based on the organ at risk. Manual contours, corrected autocontours, and autocontours are compared. For the sensitivity analyses, contouring metrics were obtained by comparing each contour with the secondbest contour; Figure S2. Radar graphs showing the mean Dice similarity coefficient value of each participant, based on the organ. (A) Manual contours. (B) Corrected autocontours. The Dice similarity coefficient values of the corrected autocontours were more homogeneous than those of the manual contours, which indicate reduced interphysician variability. For sensitivity analyses, contouring metrics were obtained by comparing each contour with the second-best contour.
Hwa Kyung ByunJee Suk ChangMin Seo ChoiJaehee ChunJinhong JungC. JeongJin Sung KimYongjin ChangSeung Yeun ChungSeung-Ryul LeeYong Bae Kim
Jason W. ChanVasant KearneySamuel HaafSusan WuMadeleine BogdanovNayha DixitAtchar SudhyadhomJosephine ChenSue S. YomTimothy D. Solberg
Elaine ChaSharif ElguindiIfeanyirochukwu OnochieDaniel GorovetsJoseph O. DeasyMichael J. ZeléfskyErin F. Gillespie
Eric Pei Ping PangHong Qi TanFuqiang WangJarkko NiemeläG. BolardSusan RamadanTimo KiljunenMarta CapalaSteven PetitJan SeppäläKristiina VuolukkaIngrid KiitamD. ZolotuhhinE. GershkevitshKaisa LehtiöJuha NikkinenJani KeyriläinenMiia MokkaMelvin L.K. Chua