ArticleKnee surgery & related research2024
Evaluation of a deep learning software for automated measurements on full-leg standing radiographs.
Article in Knee surgery & related research, 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.
- An artificial intelligence framework for universal landmark matching and morphometry in musculoskeletal radiography.European radiology · 2026Article
- AI model for automatic spinopelvic and spinal alignment parameters measurement from EOS.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
- First-Digit Distributions of Human Long-Bone Morphometric Parameters: An Exploratory X-Ray-Based Comparison with Benford's Law.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in medicine: Current applications in cardiology, oncology, and radiology.World journal of methodology · 2025Review
- Switching from active vitamin D and phosphate supplementation to burosumab significantly corrects lower limb malalignment in pediatric X-linked hypophosphatemia.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2025Observational
- Evaluation of AI Performance in Spinal Radiographic Measurements Compared to Radiologists: A Study of Accuracy and Efficiency.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-guided assessment of the hip-knee-ankle angle shows excellent correlation with experienced human raters.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
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
backgroundPrecise lower limb measurements are crucial for assessing musculoskeletal health; fully automated solutions have the potential to enhance standardization and reproducibility of these measurements. This study compared the measurements performed by BoneMetrics (Gleamer, Paris, France), a commercial artificial intelligence (AI)-based software, to expert manual measurements on anteroposterior full-leg standing radiographs.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on a dataset comprising consecutive anteroposterior full-leg standing radiographs obtained from four imaging institutions. Key anatomical landmarks to define the hip-knee-ankle angle, pelvic obliquity, leg length, femoral length, and tibial length were annotated independently by two expert musculoskeletal radiologists and served as the ground truth. The performance of the AI was compared against these reference measurements using the mean absolute error, Bland-Altman analyses, and intraclass correlation coefficients.
resultsA total of 175 anteroposterior full-leg standing radiographs from 167 patients were included in the final dataset (mean age = 49.9 ± 23.6 years old; 103 women and 64 men). Mean absolute error values were 0.30° (95% confidence interval [CI] [0.28, 0.32]) for the hip-knee-ankle angle, 0.75 mm (95% CI [0.60, 0.88]) for pelvic obliquity, 1.03 mm (95% CI [0.91,1.14]) for leg length from the top of the femoral head, 1.45 mm (95% CI [1.33, 1.60]) for leg length from the center of the femoral head, 0.95 mm (95% CI [0.85, 1.04]) for femoral length from the top of the femoral head, 1.23 mm (95% CI [1.12, 1.32]) for femoral length from the center of the femoral head, and 1.38 mm (95% CI [1.21, 1.52]) for tibial length. The Bland-Altman analyses revealed no systematic bias across all measurements. Additionally, the software exhibited excellent agreement with the gold-standard measurements with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values above 0.97 for all parameters.
conclusionsAutomated measurements on anteroposterior full-leg standing radiographs offer a reliable alternative to manual assessments. The use of AI in musculoskeletal radiology has the potential to support physicians in their daily practice without compromising patient care standards.
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.