ArticleFrontiers in radiology2024
Deep-learning for automated detection of MSU deposits on DECT: evaluating impact on efficiency and reader confidence.
Article in Frontiers in radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- DECTGoutSys: Reducing False Positive Gout Diagnoses via a Machine Vision Pipeline for Crystal Tophi Identification+Classification in Dual-Energy Computed Tomography (DECT).Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Status, challenges, and prospects of artificial intelligence application in gout diagnosis and treatment, drug research and development, and disease monitoring.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Reducing the workload of medical diagnosis through artificial intelligence: A narrative review.Medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dual-energy CT (DECT) is a non-invasive way to determine the presence of monosodium urate (MSU) crystals in the workup of gout. Color-coding distinguishes MSU from calcium following material decomposition and post-processing. Manually identifying these foci (most commonly labeled green) is tedious, and an automated detection system could streamline the process. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a deep-learning (DL) algorithm developed for detecting green pixelations on DECT on reader time, accuracy, and confidence. Methods: We collected a sample of positive and negative DECTs, reviewed twice-once with and once without the DL tool-with a 2-week washout period. An attending musculoskeletal radiologist and a fellow separately reviewed the cases, simulating clinical workflow. Metrics such as time taken, confidence in diagnosis, and the tool's helpfulness were recorded and statistically analyzed. Results: We included thirty DECTs from different patients. The DL tool significantly reduced the reading time for the trainee radiologist ( Conclusions: The implementation of the developed DL model slightly reduced reading time for our less experienced reader and led to improved diagnostic accuracy. There was no statistically significant difference in diagnostic confidence when studies were interpreted without and with the DL model.
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.