Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34083655›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Detecting pelvic fracture on 3D-CT using deep convolutional neural networks with multi-orientated slab images.

Kazutoshi Ukai, Rashedur Rahman, Naomi Yagi, Keigo Hayashi, Akihiro Maruo, Hirotsugu Muratsu, Syoji Kobashi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Artificial intelligence fracture recognition on computed tomography: review of literature and recommendations.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

7 authors.

Kazutoshi UkaiResearch and Development Center, GLORY Ltd, Himeji, Japan. ukai@mail.glory.co.jp.
Rashedur RahmanGraduate School of Engineering, University of Hyogo, Himeji, Japan.
Naomi YagiGraduate School of Engineering, University of Hyogo, Himeji, Japan.
Keigo HayashiSteel Memorial Hirohata Hospital, Himeji, Japan.
Akihiro MaruoSteel Memorial Hirohata Hospital, Himeji, Japan.
Hirotsugu MuratsuSteel Memorial Hirohata Hospital, Himeji, Japan.
Syoji KobashiGraduate School of Engineering, University of Hyogo, Himeji, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pelvic fracture is one of the leading causes of death in the elderly, carrying a high risk of death within 1 year of fracture. This study proposes an automated method to detect pelvic fractures on 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT). Deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) have been used for lesion detection on 2D and 3D medical images. However, training a DCNN directly using 3D images is complicated, computationally costly, and requires large amounts of training data. We propose a method that evaluates multiple, 2D, real-time object detection systems (YOLOv3 models) in parallel, in which each YOLOv3 model is trained using differently orientated 2D slab images reconstructed from 3D-CT. We assume that an appropriate reconstruction orientation would exist to optimally characterize image features of bone fractures on 3D-CT. Multiple YOLOv3 models in parallel detect 2D fracture candidates in different orientations simultaneously. The 3D fracture region is then obtained by integrating the 2D fracture candidates. The proposed method was validated in 93 subjects with bone fractures. Area under the curve (AUC) was 0.824, with 0.805 recall and 0.907 precision. The AUC with a single orientation was 0.652. This method was then applied to 112 subjects without bone fractures to evaluate over-detection. The proposed method successfully detected no bone fractures in all except 4 non-fracture subjects (96.4%).

Indexed as

Deep LearningImaging, Three-DimensionalNeural Networks, ComputerTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFractures, BoneHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalPelvic BonesReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID34083655
PMCPMC8175387

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.