ArticleCalcified tissue international2021
Application of Machine Learning to Identify Clinically Meaningful Risk Group for Osteoporosis in Individuals Under the Recommended Age for Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry.
Article in Calcified tissue international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Elucidating osteoporosis response signatures in rheumatoid arthritis using explainable machine learning ensembles.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Rheumatology: From Algorithms to Clinical Impact in Osteoporosis and Chronic Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Development and evaluation of a machine learning based risk prediction model for osteoporosis.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Osteoporosis Diagnosis, Risk Prediction and Therapy: Current Advances, Clinical Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Review
- Utility of clavicle cortex index as a screening tool for low bone mineral density.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Machine learning models to predict osteoporosis in patients with chronic kidney disease stage 3-5 and end-stage kidney disease.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Development and reporting of artificial intelligence in osteoporosis management.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024Review
- Bridging the Gap: A narrative review of osteoporosis disability, adipokines, and the role of AI in postmenopausal women.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2024Review
- Prediction of osteoporosis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis using machine learning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Application of machine learning algorithms to predict osteoporosis in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2023Article
- A novel primary osteoporosis screening tool (POST) for adults aged 50 years and over.Endocrine · 2023Article
- Interpretable Deep-Learning Approaches for Osteoporosis Risk Screening and Individualized Feature Analysis Using Large Population-Based Data: Model Development and Performance Evaluation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Development of Machine Learning Models for Predicting Osteoporosis in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus-A Preliminary Study.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for diagnosing osteoporosis; it is generally recommended in men ≥ 70 and women ≥ 65 years old. Therefore, assessment of clinical risk factors for osteoporosis is very important in individuals under the recommended age for DXA. Here, we examine the diagnostic performance of machine learning-based prediction models for osteoporosis in individuals under the recommended age for DXA examination. Data of 2210 men aged 50-69 and 1099 women aged 50-64 obtained from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey IV-V were analyzed. Extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) was used to find relevant clinical features and applied to three machine learning models: XGBoost, logistic regression, and a multilayer perceptron. For the prediction of osteoporosis, the XGBoost model using the top 20 features extracted from XGBoost showed the most reliable performance with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.73 and 0.79 in men and women, respectively. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the Shapley additive explanation values based on a risk-score model obtained from XGBoost and conventional osteoporosis risk assessment tools for prediction of osteoporosis using optimal cut-off values for each model. We observed that a cut-off risk score of ≥ 28 in men and ≥ 47 in women was optimal to classify a positive screening for osteoporosis (an AUROC of 0.86 in men and 0.91 in women). The XGBoost-based osteoporosis-prediction model outperformed conventional risk assessment tools. Therefore, machine learning-based prediction models are a more suitable option than conventional risk assessment methods for screening osteoporosis in individuals under the recommended age for DXA examination.
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.