Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38033522›Full record

ArticleDigital health

The ensemble artificial intelligence (AI) method: Detection of hip fractures in AP pelvis plain radiographs by majority voting using a multi-center dataset.

Salih Beyaz, Sahika Betul Yayli, Ersin Kılıc, Ugur Doktur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Salih BeyazBaşkent University Adana Dr. Turgut Noyan Research and Training Centre, Orthopedics and Traumatology Department, Adana, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5788-5116
Sahika Betul YayliTurkcell Technology, Artificial Intelligence & Digital Analytic Solutions, İstanbul, Türkiye.
Ersin KılıcTurkcell Technology, Artificial Intelligence & Digital Analytic Solutions, İstanbul, Türkiye.
Ugur DokturTurkcell Technology, Artificial Intelligence & Digital Analytic Solutions, İstanbul, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This article was undertaken to explore the potential of AI in enhancing the diagnostic accuracy and efficiency in identifying hip fractures using X-ray radiographs. In the study, we trained three distinct deep learning models, and we utilized majority voting to evaluate their outcomes, aiming to yield the most reliable and precise diagnoses of hip fractures from X-ray radiographs. Methods: An initial study was conducted of 10,849 AP pelvis X-rays obtained from five hospitals affiliated with Başkent University. Two expert orthopedic surgeons initially labeled 2,291 radiographs as fractures and 8,558 as non-fractures. The algorithm was trained on 6,943 (64%) radiographs, validated on 1,736 (16%) radiographs, and tested on 2,170 (20%) radiographs, ensuring an even distribution of fracture presence, age, and gender. We employed three advanced deep learning architectures, Xception (Model A), EfficientNet (Model B), and NfNet (Model C), with a final decision aggregated through a majority voting technique (Model D). Results: For each model, we achieved the following metrics:For Model A: F1 Score 0.895, Accuracy 0.956, Specificity 0.973, Sensitivity 0.893.For Model B: F1 Score 0.900, Accuracy 0.960, Specificity 0.991, Sensitivity 0.845.For Model C: F1 Score 0.919, Accuracy 0.966, Specificity 0.984, Sensitivity 0.899.For Model D: F1 Score 0.929, Accuracy 0.971, Specificity 0.991, Sensitivity 0.897.We concluded that Model D (majority voting) achieved the best results in terms of the F1 score, accuracy, and specificity values. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that the results obtained by aggregating the decisions of multiple models through voting, rather than relying solely on the decision of a single algorithm, are more consistent. The practical application of these algorithms will be difficult due to ethical, legal, and confidentiality issues, despite the theoretical success achieved. Developing successful algorithms and methodologies should not be viewed as the ultimate goal; it is important to understand how these algorithms will be used in real-life situations. In order to achieve more consistent results, feedback from clinical practice will be helpful.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligencebiomedical image processingdeep learningfracture detectionhip fracturemajority voting

Identifiers

PMID38033522
PMCPMC10685786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.