ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Deep Learning Method for Precise Landmark Identification and Structural Assessment of Whole-Spine Radiographs.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Automated Metrics for the Diagnosis of Instability Between the 2nd and 7th Cervical Vertebrae.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- An end-to-end pipeline for automated scoliosis diagnosis with standardized clinical reporting using SNOMED CT.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Pilot Study on the Age-Dependent, Biomechanical Properties of Longitudinal Ligaments in the Human Cervical Spine.Bioengineering (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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study measured parameters automatically by marking the point for measuring each parameter on whole-spine radiographs. Between January 2020 and December 2021, 1017 sequential lateral whole-spine radiographs were retrospectively obtained. Of these, 819 and 198 were used for training and testing the performance of the landmark detection model, respectively. To objectively evaluate the program's performance, 690 whole-spine radiographs from four other institutions were used for external validation. The combined dataset comprised radiographs from 857 female and 850 male patients (average age 42.2 ± 27.3 years; range 20-85 years). The landmark localizer showed the highest accuracy in identifying cervical landmarks (median error 1.5-2.4 mm), followed by lumbosacral landmarks (median error 2.1-3.0 mm). However, thoracic landmarks displayed larger localization errors (median 2.4-4.3 mm), indicating slightly reduced precision compared with the cervical and lumbosacral regions. The agreement between the deep learning model and two experts was good to excellent, with intraclass correlation coefficient values >0.88. The deep learning model also performed well on the external validation set. There were no statistical differences between datasets in all parameters, suggesting that the performance of the artificial intelligence model created was excellent. The proposed automatic alignment analysis system identified anatomical landmarks and positions of the spine with high precision and generated various radiograph imaging parameters that had a good correlation with manual measurements.
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.