Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32955457›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2020

Chronological Age Assessment in Young Individuals Using Bone Age Assessment Staging and Nonradiological Aspects: Machine Learning Multifactorial Approach.

Ana Luiza Dallora, Ola Kvist, Johan Sanmartin Berglund, Sandra Diaz Ruiz, Martin Boldt, Carl-Erik Flodmark, Peter Anderberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Bone age and dental age to assess criminal responsibility: Part I.International journal of legal medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ana Luiza DalloraDepartment of Health, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6752-017X
Ola KvistDepartment of Pediatric Radiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8730-5901
Johan Sanmartin BerglundDepartment of Health, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4312-2246
Sandra Diaz RuizDepartment of Pediatric Radiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2016-4195
Martin BoldtDepartment of Computer Science, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9316-4842
Carl-Erik FlodmarkDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9705-4766
Peter AnderbergDepartment of Health, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9870-8477
Blekinge Institute of Technology · SEKarolinska University Hospital · SELund University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBone age assessment (BAA) is used in numerous pediatric clinical settings as well as in legal settings when entities need an estimate of chronological age (CA) when valid documents are lacking. The latter case presents itself as critical as the law is harsher for adults and granted rights along with imputability changes drastically if the individual is a minor. Traditional BAA methods have drawbacks such as exposure of minors to radiation, they do not consider factors that might affect the bone age, and they mostly focus on a single region. Given the critical scenarios in which BAA can affect the lives of young individuals, it is important to focus on the drawbacks of the traditional methods and investigate the potential of estimating CA through BAA.

objectiveThis study aims to investigate CA estimation through BAA in young individuals aged 14-21 years with machine learning methods, addressing the drawbacks of research using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), assessment of multiple regions of interest, and other factors that may affect the bone age.

methodsMRI examinations of the radius, distal tibia, proximal tibia, distal femur, and calcaneus were performed on 465 men and 473 women (aged 14-21 years). Measures of weight and height were taken from the subjects, and a questionnaire was given for additional information (self-assessed Tanner Scale, physical activity level, parents' origin, and type of residence during upbringing). Two pediatric radiologists independently assessed the MRI images to evaluate their stage of bone development (blinded to age, gender, and each other). All the gathered information was used in training machine learning models for CA estimation and minor versus adult classification (threshold of 18 years). Different machine learning methods were investigated.

resultsThe minor versus adult classification produced accuracies of 0.90 and 0.84 for male and female subjects, respectively, with high recalls for the classification of minors. The CA estimation for the 8 age groups (aged 14-21 years) achieved mean absolute errors of 0.95 years and 1.24 years for male and female subjects, respectively. However, for the latter, a lower error occurred only for the ages of 14 and 15 years.

conclusionsThis study investigates CA estimation through BAA using machine learning methods in 2 ways: minor versus adult classification and CA estimation in 8 age groups (aged 14-21 years), while addressing the drawbacks in the research on BAA. The first achieved good results; however, for the second case, the BAA was not precise enough for the classification.

Indexed as

bone agecalcaneuschronological age assessmentdistal femurdistal tibiamachine learningmagnetic resonance imagingproximal tibiaradiusskeletal maturity

Identifiers

PMID32955457
PMCPMC7536601
OpenAlexW3087276057

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.