ArticleFrontiers in surgery2024
Compare three deep learning-based artificial intelligence models for classification of calcified lumbar disc herniation: a multicenter diagnostic study.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Recent advances and evolving strategies in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in spine care: a paradigm shift in diagnosis, surgery, and rehabilitation.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop and validate an artificial intelligence diagnostic model for identifying calcified lumbar disc herniation based on lateral lumbar magnetic resonance imaging(MRI). Methods: During the period from January 2019 to March 2024, patients meeting the inclusion criteria were collected. All patients had undergone both lumbar spine MRI and computed tomography(CT) examinations, with regions of interest (ROI) clearly marked on the lumbar sagittal MRI images. The participants were then divided into separate sets for training, testing, and external validation. Ultimately, we developed a deep learning model using the ResNet-34 algorithm model and evaluated its diagnostic efficacy. Results: A total of 1,224 eligible patients were included in this study, consisting of 610 males and 614 females, with an average age of 53.34 ± 10.61 years. Notably, the test datasets displayed an impressive classification accuracy rate of 91.67%, whereas the external validation datasets achieved a classification accuracy rate of 88.76%. Among the test datasets, the ResNet34 model outperformed other models, yielding the highest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93, 0.99). Additionally, the ResNet34 model also exhibited superior performance in the external validation datasets, exhibiting an AUC of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.93). Conclusion: In this study, we established a deep learning model with excellent performance in identifying calcified intervertebral discs, thereby offering a valuable and efficient diagnostic tool for clinical surgeons.
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.