ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Artificial intelligence automatic measurement technology of lumbosacral radiographic parameters.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence automated measurements of spinopelvic parameters in adult spinal deformity-a systematic review.Spine deformity · 2025Pooled it
- Reliability of functional imaging in assessing instability of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a deep learning-powered system for multi-version global alignment and proportion score to predict mechanical complications after adult degenerative scoliosis surgery.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Correlation Between Postoperative Changes in Imaging Parameters and Clinical Outcomes After Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Currently, manual measurement of lumbosacral radiological parameters is time-consuming and laborious, and inevitably produces considerable variability. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a deep learning-based model for automatically measuring lumbosacral radiographic parameters on lateral lumbar radiographs. Methods: We retrospectively collected 1,240 lateral lumbar radiographs to train the model. The included images were randomly divided into training, validation, and test sets in a ratio of approximately 8:1:1 for model training, fine-tuning, and performance evaluation, respectively. The parameters measured in this study were lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral horizontal angle (SHA), intervertebral space angle (ISA) at L4-L5 and L5-S1 segments, and the percentage of lumbar spondylolisthesis (PLS) at L4-L5 and L5-S1 segments. The model identified key points using image segmentation results and calculated measurements. The average results of key points annotated by the three spine surgeons were used as the reference standard. The model's performance was evaluated using the percentage of correct key points (PCK), intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), Pearson correlation coefficient (r), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), and box plots. Results: The model's mean differences from the reference standard for LL, SHA, ISA (L4-L5), ISA (L5-S1), PLS (L4-L5), and PLS (L5-S1) were 1.69°, 1.36°, 1.55°, 1.90°, 1.60%, and 2.43%, respectively. When compared with the reference standard, the measurements of the model had better correlation and consistency (LL, SHA, and ISA: ICC = 0.91-0.97, r = 0.91-0.96, MAE = 1.89-2.47, RMSE = 2.32-3.12; PLS: ICC = 0.90-0.92, r = 0.90-0.91, MAE = 1.95-2.93, RMSE = 2.52-3.70), and the differences between them were not statistically significant ( Conclusion: The model developed in this study could correctly identify key vertebral points on lateral lumbar radiographs and automatically calculate lumbosacral radiographic parameters. The measurement results of the model had good consistency and reliability compared to manual measurements. With additional training and optimization, this technology holds promise for future measurements in clinical practice and analysis of large datasets.
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.