Skip to main content

Table 5 Summary of plan quality

From: Impact of beam configuration on VMAT plan quality for Pinnacle3Auto-Planning for head and neck cases

 

Comparison of techniques

p-value

Superior technique

COV based

Scoring based

1

V2C15 vs. V1 C15

0,00009 *

0,00009 *

V2C15

2

V2C15 vs. 2V1C15

0,00012 *

0,00054 *

V2C15

3

V2C15 vs. V2C15_Part

0,0047 *

0,036 *

V2C15

4

V2C15 vs. V2C40

0,12

0,78

 

5

V2C15 vs. V2C60

0,00078 *

0,0083 *

V2C15

6

V2C15 vs. 2V1C15_60

0,43

0,39

 

7

V2C15 vs. 2V1C15_345

0,01 *

0,041 *

V2C15

8

2V1C15_60 vs. 2V1C15_345

0,0051 *

0,22

2V1C15_60

  1. Techniques with different beam configurations were compared with regard to plan quality using COV and scoring method. The p-value of the Wilcoxon signed rank test shows if the techniques differed significantly and the superior technique is listed
  2. *Significant differences are marked (p < 0,05)