Table 2.
Results obtained for the evaluation dataset with the five commercial solutions [WFB (Mirada Medical), MIM (MIM Software), SPICE (Philips), ABAS (Elekta), and RS (RayStation)] compared to expert delineation for the bladder.
| WFB | MIM | ABAS | SPICE | RS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R | 1.01 ± 0.42 | 1.49 ± 0.77 | 1.31 ± 0.48 | 0.89 ± 0.31 | 1.62 ± 0.69 |
| DSC mean | 0.76 ± 0.12 | 0.80 ± 0.14 | 0.81 ± 0.13 | 0.76 ± 0.26 | 0.59 ± 0.15 |
| DSC median | 0.77 | 0.84 | 0.85 | 0.91 | 0.58 |
| H95% (mm) | 15.0 ± 9.0 | 14.0 ± 6.3 | 13.6 ± 7.9 | 9.2 ± 11.7 | 28.5 ± 13.1 |
R is the volume ration, DSC is the Dice Similarity Coefficient, and H95% is the Hausdorff distance.