Dataset Information

Data for TROTS - The Radiotherapy Optimisation Test Set.

ABSTRACT: The Radiotherapy Optimisation Test Set (TROTS) is an extensive set of problems originating from radiotherapy (radiation therapy) treatment planning. This dataset is created for 2 purposes: (1) to supply a large-scale dense dataset to measure performance and quality of mathematical solvers, and (2) to supply a dataset to investigate the multi-criteria optimisation and decision-making nature of the radiotherapy problem. The dataset contains 120 problems (patients), divided over 6 different treatment protocols/tumour types. Each problem contains numerical data, a configuration for the optimisation problem, and data required to visualise and interpret the results. The data is stored as HDF5 compatible Matlab files, and includes scripts to work with the dataset.

SUBMITTER: Breedveld S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5387893 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Data for TROTS - The Radiotherapy Optimisation Test Set.

Breedveld Sebastiaan S Heijmen Ben B

Data in brief 20170401

The Radiotherapy Optimisation Test Set (TROTS) is an extensive set of problems originating from radiotherapy (radiation therapy) treatment planning. This dataset is created for 2 purposes: (1) to supply a large-scale dense dataset to measure performance and quality of mathematical solvers, and (2) to supply a dataset to investigate the multi-criteria optimisation and decision-making nature of the radiotherapy problem. The dataset contains 120 problems (patients), divided over 6 different treatme ...[more]

PMID: 28417100

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo establish the extent to which test set reading can represent actual clinical reporting in screening mammography.Materials and methodsInstitutional ethics approval was granted, and informed consent was obtained from each participating screen reader. The need for informed consent with respect to the use of patient materials was waived. Two hundred mammographic examinations were selected from examinations reported by 10 individual expert screen readers, resulting in 10 reader-specific test sets. Data generated from actual clinical reports were compared with three test set conditions: clinical test set reading with prior images, laboratory test set reading with prior images, and laboratory test set reading without prior images. A further set of five expert screen readers was asked to interpret a common set of images in two identical test set conditions to establish a baseline for intraobserver variability. Confidence scores (from 1 to 4) were assigned to the respective decisions made by readers. Region-of-interest (ROI) figures of merit (FOMs) and side-specific sensitivity and specificity were described for the actual clinical reporting of each reader-specific test set and were compared with those for the three test set conditions. Agreement between pairs of readings was performed by using the Kendall coefficient of concordance.ResultsModerate or acceptable levels of agreement were evident (W = 0.69-0.73, P < .01) when describing group performance between actual clinical reporting and test set conditions that were reasonably close to the established baseline (W = 0.77, P < .01) and were lowest when prior images were excluded. Higher median values for ROI FOMs were demonstrated for the test set conditions than for the actual clinical reporting values; this was possibly linked to changes in sensitivity.ConclusionReasonable levels of agreement between actual clinical reporting and test set conditions can be achieved, although inflated sensitivity may be evident with test set conditions.

Dataset Information

Data for TROTS - The Radiotherapy Optimisation Test Set.

Publications

Data for TROTS - The Radiotherapy Optimisation Test Set.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets