Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31062114›Full record

ArticleJournal of digital imaging2020

Computer-Aided Detection of Incidental Lumbar Spine Fractures from Routine Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) Studies Using a Support Vector Machine (SVM) Classifier.

Samir D Mehta, Ronnie Sebro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Artificial intelligence and spine imaging: limitations, regulatory issues and future direction.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Samir D MehtaDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Ronnie SebroDepartment of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. Ronnie.sebro@uphs.upenn.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To assess whether application of a support vector machine learning algorithm to ancillary data obtained from posterior-anterior dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) studies could identify patients with lumbar spine (L1-L4) vertebral body fractures without additional DEXA imaging or radiation. Three hundred seven patients (199 without any fractures of the spine, and 108 patients with at least one fracture of the L1, L2, L3, or L4 vertebral bodies) who had DEXA studies were evaluated. Ancillary data from DEXA output was analyzed. The dataset was split into training (80%) and test (20%) datasets. Support vector machines (SVMs) with 10-fold cross-validation and different kernels were used to identify the best kernel based on the greatest area under the curve (AUC) and the best training vectors in the training dataset. The SVM with the best kernel was then applied to the test dataset to assess the accuracy of the SVM. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the SVMs using different kernels in the test dataset were compared using DeLong's test. The SVM classifier with the linear kernel had the greatest AUC in the training dataset (AUC = 0.9258). The AUC of the SVM classifier with the linear kernel in the test dataset was 0.8963. The SVM classifier with the linear kernel had an overall average accuracy of 91.8% in the test dataset. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive of the SVM classifier with the linear kernel to detect lumbar spine fractures were 81.8%, 97.4%, 94.7%, and 90.5%, respectively. The SVM classifier with the linear kernel ROC curve had a significantly better AUC than the SVM classifier with the cubic polynomial kernel (P = 0.034) for discriminating between patients with lumbar spine fractures and control patients, but not significantly different from the SVM classifier with a radial basis function (RBF) kernel (P = 0.317) or the SVM classifier with a sigmoid kernel (P = 0.729). All fractures identified by the SVM classifiers were not prospectively identified by the radiologist. SVM analysis of ancillary data obtained from routine DEXA studies can identify lumbar spine fractures without the use of vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) DEXA imaging or radiation, and identify fractures missed by radiologists.

Indexed as

Spinal FracturesSupport Vector MachineAbsorptiometry, PhotonAgedComputersFemaleHumansMaleROC CurveDEXALumbar spine fractureOsteoporosisSupport vector machine

Identifiers

PMID31062114
PMCPMC7064727

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.