Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34531406›Full record

ArticleNature communications2021

Automated bone mineral density prediction and fracture risk assessment using plain radiographs via deep learning.

Chen-I Hsieh, Kang Zheng, Chihung Lin, Ling Mei, Le Lu, Weijian Li, Fang-Ping Chen, Yirui Wang, Xiaoyun Zhou, Fakai Wang and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

84 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

14 authors.

Chen-I HsiehDivision of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-3715-0363
Kang ZhengPAII Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5922-8312
Chihung LinCenter for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Ling MeiWuhan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuhan, China.
Le LuPAII Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6799-9416
Weijian LiPAII Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA.
Fang-Ping ChenDepartment of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Kwei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-5228-5755
Yirui WangPAII Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9804-8736
Xiaoyun ZhouPAII Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7886-8596
Fakai WangPAII Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3750-2819
Guotong XiePing An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd., Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2772-8961
Jing XiaoPing An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd., Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9615-4749
Shun MiaoPAII Inc., Bethesda, MD, USA. shwinmiao@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4688-7087
Chang-Fu KuoDivision of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan. zandis@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9770-5730

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is underutilized to measure bone mineral density (BMD) and evaluate fracture risk. We present an automated tool to identify fractures, predict BMD, and evaluate fracture risk using plain radiographs. The tool performance is evaluated on 5164 and 18175 patients with pelvis/lumbar spine radiographs and Hologic DXA. The model is well calibrated with minimal bias in the hip (slope = 0.982, calibration-in-the-large = -0.003) and the lumbar spine BMD (slope = 0.978, calibration-in-the-large = 0.003). The area under the precision-recall curve and accuracy are 0.89 and 91.7% for hip osteoporosis, 0.89 and 86.2% for spine osteoporosis, 0.83 and 95.0% for high 10-year major fracture risk, and 0.96 and 90.0% for high hip fracture risk. The tool classifies 5206 (84.8%) patients with 95% positive or negative predictive value for osteoporosis, compared to 3008 DXA conducted at the same study period. This automated tool may help identify high-risk patients for osteoporosis.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBone DensityDeep LearningAbsorptiometry, PhotonAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFractures, BoneHip FracturesHumansLumbar VertebraeMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporosisRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID34531406
PMCPMC8446034

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.