Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32524787›Full record

ArticleKorean journal of radiology2020

Automatic Detection and Classification of Rib Fractures on Thoracic CT Using Convolutional Neural Network: Accuracy and Feasibility.

Qing Qing Zhou, Jiashuo Wang, Wen Tang, Zhang Chun Hu, Zi Yi Xia, Xue Song Li, Rongguo Zhang, Xindao Yin, Bing Zhang, Hong Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Korean journal of radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

10 authors.

Qing Qing ZhouDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6699-9617
Jiashuo WangResearch Center of Biostatistics and Computational Pharmacy, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, China.
Wen TangFL 8, Ocean International Center E, Beijing, China.
Zhang Chun HuDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Zi Yi XiaDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Xue Song LiDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Rongguo ZhangFL 8, Ocean International Center E, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6566-8843
Xindao YinDepartment of Radiology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6958-5201
Bing ZhangDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3953-0290
Hong ZhangDepartment of Radiology, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China. jnyyfsk@126.com.ORCID 0000-0002-1770-6582

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the performance of a convolutional neural network (CNN) model that can automatically detect and classify rib fractures, and output structured reports from computed tomography (CT) images. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study included 1079 patients (median age, 55 years; men, 718) from three hospitals, between January 2011 and January 2019, who were divided into a monocentric training set (n = 876; median age, 55 years; men, 582), five multicenter/multiparameter validation sets (n = 173; median age, 59 years; men, 118) with different slice thicknesses and image pixels, and a normal control set (n = 30; median age, 53 years; men, 18). Three classifications (fresh, healing, and old fracture) combined with fracture location (corresponding CT layers) were detected automatically and delivered in a structured report. Precision, recall, and F1-score were selected as metrics to measure the optimum CNN model. Detection/diagnosis time, precision, and sensitivity were employed to compare the diagnostic efficiency of the structured report and that of experienced radiologists.

resultsA total of 25054 annotations (fresh fracture, 10089; healing fracture, 10922; old fracture, 4043) were labelled for training (18584) and validation (6470). The detection efficiency was higher for fresh fractures and healing fractures than for old fractures (F1-scores, 0.849, 0.856, 0.770, respectively,

conclusionOur CNN model for automatic rib fracture detection could assist radiologists in improving diagnostic efficiency, reducing diagnosis time and radiologists' workload.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedRib FracturesROC CurveThoraxYoung AdultArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networksDeep learningMultidetector computed tomographyRib fracturesStructured report

Identifiers

PMID32524787
PMCPMC7289688

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.