ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Spine MRI.
Review 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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Decision Support in Rural Spine Care: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Veterinary Neurology: Comparative Insights From Human Medicine and Cross-Species Technology Transfer.Veterinary medicine and science · 2026Review
- Review
- Effectiveness and reliability of AI in diagnosis and robot-assisted spinal and cranial surgery: efficient outcomes and ethical worries.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Feasibility of fully automatic assessment of cervical canal stenosis using MRI via deep learning.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Comparative Assessment of Manual Segmentation of Cerebral Infarction Lesions in Experimental Animals Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Artificial Intelligence.Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2025Article
- The evolution of cervical spine trauma classification: a paradigm shift from morphological description to clinical decision-making.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Diagnostic imaging, particularly MRI, plays a key role in the evaluation of many spine pathologies. Recent progress in artificial intelligence and its subset, machine learning, has led to many applications within spine MRI, which we sought to examine in this review. A literature search of the major databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov) was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search yielded 1226 results, of which 50 studies were selected for inclusion. Key data from these studies were extracted. Studies were categorized thematically into the following: Image Acquisition and Processing, Segmentation, Diagnosis and Treatment Planning, and Patient Selection and Prognostication. Gaps in the literature and the proposed areas of future research are discussed. Current research demonstrates the ability of artificial intelligence to improve various aspects of this field, from image acquisition to analysis and clinical care. We also acknowledge the limitations of current technology. Future work will require collaborative efforts in order to fully exploit new technologies while addressing the practical challenges of generalizability and implementation. In particular, the use of foundation models and large-language models in spine MRI is a promising area, warranting further research. Studies assessing model performance in real-world clinical settings will also help uncover unintended consequences and maximize the benefits for patient care.
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.