ArticleJSES international2023
Comparing bone shape models from deep learning processing of magnetic resonance imaging to computed tomography-based models.
Article in JSES international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Shoulder Pain Imaging: A Narrative Review of Current Practice and Emerging Trends.Current medical imaging · 2025Article
- Machine learning models for clinical and structural knee osteoarthritis prediction: Recent advancements and future directions.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence demonstrates potential to enhance orthopaedic imaging across multiple modalities: A systematic review.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Leveraging digital twins for improved orthopaedic evaluation and treatment.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Harnessing deep learning and statistical shape modelling for three-dimensional evaluation of joint bony morphology.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Morphometric and clinical comparison of MRI-based synthetic CT to conventional CT of the hip in children.Pediatric radiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this study was to develop a deep learning approach to automatically segment the scapular bone on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images and to compare the accuracy of these three-dimensional (3D) models with that of 3D computed tomography (CT). Methods: Fifty-five patients with high-resolution 3D fat-saturated T2 MRI were retrospectively identified. The underlying pathology included rotator cuff tendinopathy and tears, shoulder instability, and impingement. Two experienced musculoskeletal researchers manually segmented the scapular bone. Five cross-validation training and validation splits were generated to independently train two-dimensional (2D) and 3D models using a convolutional neural network approach. Model performance was evaluated using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). All models with DSC > 0.70 were ensembled and used for the test set, which consisted of four patients with matching high-resolution MRI and CT scans. Clinically relevant glenoid measurements, including glenoid height, width, and retroversion, were calculated for two of the patients. Paired Results: The 2D and 3D models achieved a best DSC of 0.86 and 0.82, respectively, with no significant difference observed. Augmentation of imaging data significantly improved 3D but not 2D model performance. In comparing clinical measurements of 3D MRI and CT, there was a mean difference ranging from 1.29 mm to 3.46 mm and 0.05° to 7.47°. Conclusion: We have presented a fully automatic, deep learning-based strategy for extracting scapular shape from a high-resolution MRI scan. Further developments of this technology have the potential to allow for surgeons to obtain all clinically relevant information from MRI scans and reduce the need for multiple imaging studies for patients with shoulder pathology.
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.