Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36374292›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2023

Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN).

Jasper Prijs, Zhibin Liao, Minh-Son To, Johan Verjans, Paul C Jutte, Vincent Stirler, Jakub Olczak, Max Gordon, Daniel Guss, Christopher W DiGiovanni and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

14 authors.

Jasper PrijsDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Groningen University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands. jasperprijs@icloud.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4537-2273
Zhibin LiaoAustralian Institute for Machine Learning, Adelaide, Australia.
Minh-Son ToCollege of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Johan VerjansAustralian Institute for Machine Learning, Adelaide, Australia.
Paul C JutteDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Groningen University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Vincent StirlerDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Groningen University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Jakub OlczakInstitute of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd University Hospital, Karolinska Institute, Solna, Sweden.
Max GordonInstitute of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd University Hospital, Karolinska Institute, Solna, Sweden.
Daniel GussMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA.
Christopher W DiGiovanniMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA.
Ruurd L JaarsmaDepartment of Orthopaedic & Trauma Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Frank F A IJpmaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Groningen University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Job N DoornbergDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Groningen University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Machine Learning Consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeConvolutional neural networks (CNNs) are increasingly being developed for automated fracture detection in orthopaedic trauma surgery. Studies to date, however, are limited to providing classification based on the entire image-and only produce heatmaps for approximate fracture localization instead of delineating exact fracture morphology. Therefore, we aimed to answer (1) what is the performance of a CNN that detects, classifies, localizes, and segments an ankle fracture, and (2) would this be externally valid?

methodsThe training set included 326 isolated fibula fractures and 423 non-fracture radiographs. The Detectron2 implementation of the Mask R-CNN was trained with labelled and annotated radiographs. The internal validation (or 'test set') and external validation sets consisted of 300 and 334 radiographs, respectively. Consensus agreement between three experienced fellowship-trained trauma surgeons was defined as the ground truth label. Diagnostic accuracy and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) were used to assess classification performance. The Intersection over Union (IoU) was used to quantify accuracy of the segmentation predictions by the CNN, where a value of 0.5 is generally considered an adequate segmentation.

resultsThe final CNN was able to classify fibula fractures according to four classes (Danis-Weber A, B, C and No Fracture) with AUC values ranging from 0.93 to 0.99. Diagnostic accuracy was 89% on the test set with average sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 96%. External validity was 89-90% accurate on a set of radiographs from a different hospital. Accuracies/AUCs observed were 100/0.99 for the 'No Fracture' class, 92/0.99 for 'Weber B', 88/0.93 for 'Weber C', and 76/0.97 for 'Weber A'. For the fracture bounding box prediction by the CNN, a mean IoU of 0.65 (SD ± 0.16) was observed. The fracture segmentation predictions by the CNN resulted in a mean IoU of 0.47 (SD ± 0.17).

conclusionsThis study presents a look into the 'black box' of CNNs and represents the first automated delineation (segmentation) of fracture lines on (ankle) radiographs. The AUC values presented in this paper indicate good discriminatory capability of the CNN and substantiate further study of CNNs in detecting and classifying ankle fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II, Diagnostic imaging study.

Indexed as

Ankle FracturesOrthopedicsFibulaHumansNeural Networks, ComputerRadiographyAnkleArtificial IntelligenceCNNLateral Malleolus

Identifiers

PMID36374292
PMCPMC10175446

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.