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)