ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Development of Hallux Valgus Classification Using Digital Foot Images with Machine Learning.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward Smarter Orthopedic Care: Classifying Plantar Footprints from RGB Images Using Vision Transformers and CNNs.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Deep Learning and Vision Transformer for Medical Image Analysis.Journal of imaging · 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hallux valgus, a frequently seen foot deformity, requires early detection to prevent it from becoming more severe. It is a medical economic problem, so a means of quickly distinguishing it would be helpful. We designed and investigated the accuracy of an early version of a tool for screening hallux valgus using machine learning. The tool would ascertain whether patients had hallux valgus by analyzing pictures of their feet. In this study, 507 images of feet were used for machine learning. Image preprocessing was conducted using the comparatively simple pattern A (rescaling, angle adjustment, and trimming) and slightly more complicated pattern B (same, plus vertical flip, binary formatting, and edge emphasis). This study used the VGG16 convolutional neural network. Pattern B machine learning was more accurate than pattern A. In our early model, Pattern A achieved 0.62 for accuracy, 0.56 for precision, 0.94 for recall, and 0.71 for F1 score. As for Pattern B, the scores were 0.79, 0.77, 0.96, and 0.86, respectively. Machine learning was sufficiently accurate to distinguish foot images between feet with hallux valgus and normal feet. With further refinement, this tool could be used for the easy screening of hallux valgus.
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.