ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2020
Computer-Aided Detection AI Reduces Interreader Variability in Grading Hip Abnormalities With MRI.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progress in machine learning-assisted medical imaging for osteoarthritis and osteoporosis diagnosis: a narrative review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Review
- [Differentiation of osteoarthritis phenotypes on MRI using artificial intelligence].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Deep learning classification models demonstrate high accuracy and clinical potential in radiograph interpretation in the arthroplasty clinical pathway: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Bibliometric analysis of the application of artificial intelligence in orthopedic imaging.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in musculoskeletal imaging: realistic clinical applications in the next decade.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
- Bone marrow lesions in osteoarthritis: From basic science to clinical implications.Bone reports · 2023Article
- Utilizing a Digital Swarm Intelligence Platform to Improve Consensus Among Radiologists and Exploring Its Applications.Journal of digital imaging · 2023Article
- DomainATM: Domain adaptation toolbox for medical data analysis.NeuroImage · 2023Article
- Studying osteoarthritis with artificial intelligence applied to magnetic resonance imaging.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2022Review
- Automated delineation of orbital abscess depicted on CT scan using deep learning.Medical physics · 2021Article
- Deep learning for large scale MRI-based morphological phenotyping of osteoarthritis.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate interpretation of hip MRI is time-intensive and difficult, prone to inter- and intrareviewer variability, and lacks a universally accepted grading scale to evaluate morphological abnormalities. PURPOSE: To 1) develop and evaluate a deep-learning-based model for binary classification of hip osteoarthritis (OA) morphological abnormalities on MR images, and 2) develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-based assist tool to find if using the model predictions improves interreader agreement in hip grading. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective study aimed to evaluate a technical development. POPULATION: A total of 764 MRI volumes (364 patients) obtained from two studies (242 patients from LASEM [FORCe] and 122 patients from UCSF), split into a 65-25-10% train, validation, test set for network training. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3T MRI, 2D T ASSESSMENT: Automatic binary classification of cartilage lesions, bone marrow edema-like lesions, and subchondral cyst-like lesions using the MRNet, interreader agreement before and after using network predictions. STATISTICAL TESTS: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, area under curve (AUC), specificity and sensitivity, and balanced accuracy.
resultsFor cartilage lesions, bone marrow edema-like lesions and subchondral cyst-like lesions the AUCs were: 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65, 0.95), 0.84 (95% CI 0.67, 1.00), and 0.77 (95% CI 0.66, 0.85), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the radiologist for binary classification were: 0.79 (95% CI 0.65, 0.93) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.59, 1.02), 0.40 (95% CI -0.02, 0.83) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.59, 0.86), 0.75 (95% CI 0.45, 1.05) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.77, 0.98). The interreader balanced accuracy increased from 53%, 71% and 56% to 60%, 73% and 68% after using the network predictions and saliency maps. DATA
conclusionWe have shown that a deep-learning approach achieved high performance in clinical classification tasks on hip MR images, and that using the predictions from the deep-learning model improved the interreader agreement in all pathologies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;52:1163-1172.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.