ArticleBMJ open2024
AI-based X-ray fracture analysis of the distal radius: accuracy between representative classification, detection and segmentation deep learning models for clinical practice.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in virtual fracture clinics: a systematic review of imaging and clinical-text tools.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Pooled it
- Trochanteric region fracture classification network (TRFC-net): a deep learning solution to increasing inexperienced residents' trochanteric region fracture classification accuracy on X-rays.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- AI in Hand and Wrist Radiography: Multimodal Large Language Models for Distal Radius Fracture Detection and Characterization.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Orthopaedics: Clinical Performance, Limitations, and Translational Readiness-A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Advances in Artificial Intelligence for Wrist Joint Injury Diagnosis.International journal of medical sciences · 2026Review
- A Computer Vision and Machine Learning Approach to Classify Views in Distal Radius Radiographs.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2025Article
- Optimizing the power of AI for fracture detection: from blind spots to breakthroughs.Skeletal radiology · 2025Review
- Impact of prompting on large language model performance: ChatGPT-4 performance on the 2023 hand surgery self-assessment examination.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2025Article
- Comparative accuracy of two commercial AI algorithms for musculoskeletal trauma detection in emergency radiographs.Emergency radiology · 2025Article
- Cross-validation of an artificial intelligence tool for fracture classification and localization on conventional radiography in Dutch population.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in fracture detection on radiographs: a literature review.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Integrating blockchain technology with artificial intelligence for the diagnosis of tibial plateau fractures.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Emergency Trauma Care: A Preliminary Scoping Review.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo aid in selecting the optimal artificial intelligence (AI) solution for clinical application, we directly compared performances of selected representative custom-trained or commercial classification, detection and segmentation models for fracture detection on musculoskeletal radiographs of the distal radius by aligning their outputs. DESIGN AND
settingThis single-centre retrospective study was conducted on a random subset of emergency department radiographs from 2008 to 2018 of the distal radius in Germany. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn image set was created to be compatible with training and testing classification and segmentation models by annotating examinations for fractures and overlaying fracture masks, if applicable. Representative classification and segmentation models were trained on 80% of the data. After output binarisation, their derived fracture detection performances as well as that of a standard commercially available solution were compared on the remaining X-rays (20%) using mainly accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC).
resultsA total of 2856 examinations with 712 (24.9%) fractures were included in the analysis. Accuracies reached up to 0.97 for the classification model, 0.94 for the segmentation model and 0.95 for BoneView. Cohen's kappa was at least 0.80 in pairwise comparisons, while Fleiss' kappa was 0.83 for all models. Fracture predictions were visualised with all three methods at different levels of detail, ranking from downsampled image region for classification over bounding box for detection to single pixel-level delineation for segmentation.
conclusionsAll three investigated approaches reached high performances for detection of distal radius fractures with simple preprocessing and postprocessing protocols on the custom-trained models. Despite their underlying structural differences, selection of one's fracture analysis AI tool in the frame of this study reduces to the desired flavour of automation: automated classification, AI-assisted manual fracture reading or minimised false negatives.
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.