Trial reportComputational intelligence and neuroscience2022
Artificial Intelligence-Based CT Imaging on Diagnosis of Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation by Scalpel Treatment.
Trial report in Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence and Its Impact on the Management of Lumbar Degenerative Pathology: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- How AI May Transform Musculoskeletal Imaging.Radiology · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore the application effect of computed tomography (CT) image based on active contour segmentation algorithm in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) with scalpel. 78 patients with LDH were selected and divided into a lateral crypt block treatment group (group A) and a scalpel treatment group (group B) randomly. All the patients were examined by lumbar CT images based on artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm. Then, the clinical efficacy and Japanese orthopedic association (JOA) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores were compared between the two groups. It was found that the total effective rate in group B was higher (92.31% vs. 84.62%) (
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.