ArticleNutrients2024
Validation of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Ultrasound Imaging System for Quantifying Muscle Architecture Parameters of the Rectus Femoris in Disease-Related Malnutrition (DRM).
Article in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comment on "Artificial intelligence-assisted muscular ultrasonography for assessing inflammation and muscle mass in patients at risk of malnutrition".Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Muscle Ultrasound: A Novel Approach to Nutritional Evaluation Beyond Quantity in Neurological Patients.Nutrients · 2026Observational
- Radiomic features from intratumoral and peritumoral regions on portal venous phase CT for multicenter prediction of TP53 mutation in pancreatic cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Ultrasound medicine in the era of precision theranostics: Mechanisms, molecular strategies, and clinical translation.Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Muscle Mass and Quality With an AI-Based Muscle Ultrasound Imaging System in Patients at Risk of Malnutrition.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025Observational
- Observational
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Muscular Ultrasonography for Assessing Inflammation and Muscle Mass in Patients at Risk of Malnutrition.Nutrients · 2025Observational
- Automatic Analysis of Ultrasound Images to Estimate Subcutaneous and Visceral Fat and Muscle Tissue in Patients with Suspected Malnutrition.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Blood DNA Methylation in Nuclear and Mitochondrial Sequences Links to Malnutrition and Poor Prognosis in ALS: A Longitudinal Study.Nutrients · 2025Article
- A Decade of Progress in Ultrasound Assessments of Subcutaneous and Total Body Fat: A Scoping Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Impact of Hydroxy-Methyl-Butyrate Supplementation on Malnourished Patients Assessed Using AI-Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-assisted rectus femoris ultrasound vs. L3 computed tomography for sarcopenia assessment in oncology patients: establishing diagnostic cut-offs for muscle mass and quality.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: The aim was to validate an AI-based system compared to the classic method of reading ultrasound images of the rectus femur (RF) muscle in a real cohort of patients with disease-related malnutrition. (2) Methods: One hundred adult patients with DRM aged 18 to 85 years were enrolled. The risk of DRM was assessed by the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM). The variation, reproducibility, and reliability of measurements for the RF subcutaneous fat thickness (SFT), muscle thickness (MT), and cross-sectional area (CSA), were measured conventionally with the incorporated tools of a portable ultrasound imaging device (method A) and compared with the automated quantification of the ultrasound imaging system (method B). (3) Results: Measurements obtained using method A (i.e., conventionally) and method B (i.e., raw images analyzed by AI), showed similar values with no significant differences in absolute values and coefficients of variation, 58.39-57.68% for SFT, 30.50-28.36% for MT, and 36.50-36.91% for CSA, respectively. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) for reliability and consistency analysis between methods A and B showed correlations of 0.912 and 95% CI [0.872-0.940] for SFT, 0.960 and 95% CI [0.941-0.973] for MT, and 0.995 and 95% CI [0.993-0.997] for CSA; the Bland-Altman Analysis shows that the spread of points is quite uniform around the bias lines with no evidence of strong bias for any variable. (4) Conclusions: The study demonstrated the consistency and reliability of this new automatic system based on machine learning and AI for the quantification of ultrasound imaging of the muscle architecture parameters of the rectus femoris muscle compared with the conventional method of measurement.
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.