ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2024
Differential Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis and Charcot Neuropathic Osteoarthropathy with Deep Learning Methods.
Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in the application of artificial intelligence-driven multi-modal imaging technologies in the comprehensive diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2026Review
- Gated Backbone Fusion with Transformer Encoder for Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis Screening and Localization in Radiographs.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning in diabetic-foot osteomyelitis: current applications, challenges, and future directions.Journal of bone and joint infection · 2026Review
- Machine learning-based prediction of major amputation risk after initial limb-preserving surgery in diabetic foot.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Deep Learning for Sex Estimation from Whole-Foot X-Rays: Benchmarking CNNs for Rapid Forensic Identification.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our study aims to evaluate the potential of a deep learning (DL) algorithm for differentiating the signal intensity of bone marrow between osteomyelitis (OM), Charcot neuropathic osteoarthropathy (CNO), and trauma (TR). The local ethics committee approved this retrospective study. From 148 patients, segmentation resulted in 679 labeled regions for T1-weighted images (comprising 151 CNO, 257 OM, and 271 TR) and 714 labeled regions for T2-weighted images (consisting of 160 CNO, 272 OM, and 282 TR). We employed both multi-class classification (MCC) and binary-class classification (BCC) approaches to compare the classification outcomes of CNO, TR, and OM. The ResNet-50 and the EfficientNet-b0 accuracy values were computed at 96.2% and 97.1%, respectively, for T1-weighted images. Additionally, accuracy values for ResNet-50 and the EfficientNet-b0 were determined at 95.6% and 96.8%, respectively, for T2-weighted images. Also, according to BCC for CNO, OM, and TR, the sensitivity of ResNet-50 is 91.1%, 92.4%, and 96.6% and the sensitivity of EfficientNet-b0 is 93.2%, 97.6%, and 98.1% for T1, respectively. For CNO, OM, and TR, the sensitivity of ResNet-50 is 94.9%, 83.6%, and 97.9% and the sensitivity of EfficientNet-b0 is 95.6%, 85.2%, and 98.6% for T2, respectively. The specificity values of ResNet-50 for CNO, OM, and TR in T1-weighted images are 98.1%, 97.9%, and 94.7% and 98.6%, 97.5%, and 96.7% in T2-weighted images respectively. Similarly, for EfficientNet-b0, the specificity values are 98.9%, 98.7%, and 98.4% and 99.1%, 98.5%, and 98.7% for T1-weighted and T2-weighted images respectively. In the diabetic foot, deep learning methods serve as a non-invasive tool to differentiate CNO, OM, and TR with high accuracy.
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.