ArticleScientific data2024
Clinical benchmark dataset for AI accuracy analysis: quantifying radiographic annotation of pelvic tilt.
Article in Scientific data, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated Cortical Thickness Index Measurement in Pelvic Radiographs Using a Multi-Stage Deep Learning Framework.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluating Alternative Registration Planes in Imageless, Computer-Assisted Navigation Systems for Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiographic landmark annotation determines patients' anatomical parameters and influences diagnoses. However, challenges arise from ambiguous region-based definitions, human error, and image quality variations, potentially compromising patient care. Additionally, AI landmark localization often presents its predictions in a probability-based heatmap format, which lacks a corresponding clinical standard for accuracy validation. This Data Descriptor presents a clinical benchmark dataset for pelvic tilt landmarks, gathered through a probabilistic approach to measure annotation accuracy within clinical environments. A retrospective analysis of 115 pelvic sagittal radiographs was conducted for annotating pelvic tilt parameters by five annotators, revealing landmark cloud sizes of 6.04 mm-17.90 mm at a 95% dataset threshold, corresponding to 9.51°-16.55° maximum angular disagreement in clinical settings. The outcome provides a quantified point cloud dataset for each landmark corresponding to different probabilities, which enables assessment of directional annotation distribution and parameter-wise impact, providing clinical benchmarks. The data is readily reusable for AI studies analyzing the same landmarks, and the method can be easily replicated for establishing clinical accuracy benchmarks of other landmarks.
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.