Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39162939›Full record

ArticleLa Radiologia medica2024

Performance of two different artificial intelligence (AI) methods for assessing carpal bone age compared to the standard Greulich and Pyle method.

Davide Alaimo, Maria Chiara Terranova, Ettore Palizzolo, Manfredi De Angelis, Vittorio Avella, Giuseppe Paviglianiti, Giuseppe Lo Re, Domenica Matranga, Sergio Salerno

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in La Radiologia medica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Davide AlaimoDipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Via del Vespro 127, 90127, Palermo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-9909-7903
Maria Chiara TerranovaUOC Radiologia Pediatrica Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini e Interventistica, ARNAS, Ospedali Civico, Di Cristina Benfratelli, Palermo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1623-834X
Ettore PalizzoloDipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Via del Vespro 127, 90127, Palermo, Italy.
Manfredi De AngelisDipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Via del Vespro 127, 90127, Palermo, Italy.
Vittorio AvellaDipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Via del Vespro 127, 90127, Palermo, Italy.
Giuseppe PaviglianitiUOC Radiologia Pediatrica Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini e Interventistica, ARNAS, Ospedali Civico, Di Cristina Benfratelli, Palermo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5994-778X
Giuseppe Lo ReDipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Via del Vespro 127, 90127, Palermo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7479-948X
Domenica MatrangaDipartimento Promozione della Salute, Materno-Infantile (PROMISE), Università Di Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2466-937X
Sergio SalernoDipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Via del Vespro 127, 90127, Palermo, Italy. ssalerno@sirm.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1020-3437

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEvaluate the agreement between bone age assessments conducted by two distinct machine learning system and standard Greulich and Pyle method. MATERIALS AND

methodsCarpal radiographs of 225 patients (mean age 8 years and 10 months, SD = 3 years and 1 month) were retrospectively analysed at two separate institutions (October 2018 and May 2022) by both expert radiologists and radiologists in training as well as by two distinct AI software programmes, 16-bit AI

resultsThe bone age range estimated by the 16-bit AI

conclusionsBoth AI methods and GP provide correlated results, although the measurements made by AI were closer to each other compared to the GP method.

Indexed as

Age Determination by SkeletonArtificial IntelligenceCarpal BonesAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantMaleRetrospective StudiesAge assessmentArtificial intelligenceBone ageCarpal age

Identifiers

PMID39162939
PMCPMC11480116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.