↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Use of image registration and fusion algorithms and techniques in radiotherapy: Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 132

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Physics, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
86 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
239 Mendeley
Title
Use of image registration and fusion algorithms and techniques in radiotherapy: Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 132
Published in
Medical Physics, May 2017
DOI 10.1002/mp.12256
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristy K. Brock, Sasa Mutic, Todd R. McNutt, Hua Li, Marc L. Kessler

Abstract

Image registration and fusion algorithms exist in almost every software system that creates or uses images in radiotherapy. Most treatment planning systems support some form of image registration and fusion to allow the use of multimodality and time-series image data and even anatomical atlases to assist in target volume and normal tissue delineation. Treatment delivery systems perform registration and fusion between the planning images and the in-room images acquired during the treatment to assist patient positioning. Advanced applications are beginning to support daily dose assessment and enable adaptive radiotherapy using image registration and fusion to propagate contours and accumulate dose between image data taken over the course of therapy to provide up-to-date estimates of anatomical changes and delivered dose. This information aids in the detection of anatomical and functional changes that might elicit changes in the treatment plan or prescription. Since the output of the image registration process is always used as the input of another process for planning or delivery, it is important to understand and communicate the uncertainty associated with the software in general and the result of a specific registration. Unfortunately, there is no standard mathematical formalism to perform this for real world situations where noise, distortion, and complex anatomical variations can occur. Validation of the software systems performance is also complicated by the lack of documentation available from commercial systems leading to use of these systems in undesirable 'black-box' fashion. In view of this situation and the central role that image registration and fusion play in treatment planning and delivery, the Therapy Physics Committee of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine commissioned Task Group 132 to review current approaches and solutions for image registration (both rigid and deformable) in radiotherapy and to provide recommendations for quality assurance and quality control of these clinical processes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 239 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 238 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 21%
Other 41 17%
Researcher 37 15%
Student > Master 35 15%
Unspecified 25 10%
Other 51 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 92 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 52 22%
Unspecified 51 21%
Engineering 16 7%
Computer Science 9 4%
Other 19 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 22 July 2017.
All research outputs
#2,043,428
of 12,362,744 outputs
Outputs from Medical Physics
#281
of 5,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,770
of 266,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Physics
#6
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,362,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,413 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
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 266,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.