ArticlePediatric radiology2024
Artificial intelligence-based detection of paediatric appendicular skeletal fractures: performance and limitations for common fracture types and locations.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Convolutional neural networks in paediatric fracture detection: pooled evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Identifying the diagnostic utility of artificial intelligence for elbow effusion detection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Emergency radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence (AI) in radiological paediatric fracture assessment: an updated systematic review.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Small lesion-high risk: diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence in paediatric fractures with medicolegal impact.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- Independent bone-level diagnostic accuracy study of an AI tool for detecting appendicular skeletal fractures on radiographs.European radiology · 2026Article
- Multivendor comparison study of artificial intelligence software for automated fracture detection in paediatric patients.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- Pediatric fracture classification in plain radiographs using EfficientNetV2 with proximal policy optimization fine-tuning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Fracture Detection on Bone Radiographs: The Impact of an AI Tool on Orthopaedic Night Shifts.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- AI detection of knee joint effusion from radiographs: Comparative accuracy of two commercial algorithms.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Digital Eye: Deep Learning for Detecting Physeal Fractures of the Pediatric Distal Radius.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Article
- Diagnostic value of artificial intelligence-based software for the detection of pediatric upper extremity fractures.European radiology · 2026Article
- Impact of test set composition on AI performance in pediatric wrist fracture detection in X-rays.European radiology · 2025Article
- Real-life benefit of artificial intelligence-based fracture detection in a pediatric emergency department.European radiology · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Paediatric and Adolescent Fracture Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2025Review
- Comparative accuracy of two commercial AI algorithms for musculoskeletal trauma detection in emergency radiographs.Emergency radiology · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in the interpretation of upper extremity trauma radiographs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in fracture detection on radiographs: a literature review.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence (AI) for paediatric fracture detection: a multireader multicase (MRMC) study protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Fracture pain in children in the emergency department: the impact of a new pain management procedure.BMC emergency medicine · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch into artificial intelligence (AI)-based fracture detection in children is scarce and has disregarded the detection of indirect fracture signs and dislocations.
objectiveTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of an existing AI-tool for the detection of fractures, indirect fracture signs, and dislocations. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn AI software, BoneView (Gleamer, Paris, France), was assessed for diagnostic accuracy of fracture detection using paediatric radiology consensus diagnoses as reference. Radiographs from a single emergency department were enrolled retrospectively going back from December 2021, limited to 1,000 radiographs per body part. Enrolment criteria were as follows: suspected fractures of the forearm, lower leg, or elbow; age 0-18 years; and radiographs in at least two projections.
resultsLower leg radiographs showed 607 fractures. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were high (87.5%, 87.5%, 98.3%, 98.3%, respectively). Detection rate was low for toddler's fractures, trampoline fractures, and proximal tibial Salter-Harris-II fractures. Forearm radiographs showed 1,137 fractures. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were high (92.9%, 98.1%, 98.4%, 91.7%, respectively). Radial and ulnar bowing fractures were not reliably detected (one out of 11 radial bowing fractures and zero out of seven ulnar bowing fractures were correctly detected). Detection rate was low for styloid process avulsions, proximal radial buckle, and complete olecranon fractures. Elbow radiographs showed 517 fractures. Sensitivity and NPV were moderate (80.5%, 84.7%, respectively). Specificity and PPV were high (94.9%, 93.3%, respectively). For joint effusion, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were moderate (85.1%, 85.7%, 89.5%, 80%, respectively). For elbow dislocations, sensitivity and PPV were low (65.8%, 50%, respectively). Specificity and NPV were high (97.7%, 98.8%, respectively).
conclusionsThe diagnostic performance of BoneView is promising for forearm and lower leg fractures. However, improvement is mandatory before clinicians can rely solely on AI-based paediatric fracture detection using this software.
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.