ArticlePloS one2025
Deep learning based screening model for hip diseases on plain radiographs.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe interpretation of plain hip radiographs can vary widely among physicians. This study aimed to develop and validate a deep learning-based screening model for distinguishing normal hips from severe hip diseases on plain radiographs.
methodsElectronic medical records and plain radiograph from 2004 to 2012 were used to construct two patient groups: the hip disease group (those who underwent total hip arthroplasty) and normal group. A total of 1,726 radiographs (500 normal hip radiographs and 1,226 radiographs with hip diseases, respectively) were included and were allocated for training (320 and 783), validation (80 and 196), and test (100 and 247) groups. Four different models were designed-raw image for both training and test set, preprocessed image for training but raw image for the test set, preprocessed images for both sets, and change of backbone algorithm from DenseNet to EfficientNet. The deep learning models were compared in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), F1-score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 54.0 ± 14.8 years in the hip disease group and 49.8 ± 14.9 years in the normal group. The final model showed highest performance in both the internal test set (accuracy 0.96, sensitivity 0.96, specificity 0.97, PPV 0.99, NPV 0.99, F1-score 0.97, and AUROC 0.99) and the external validation set (accuracy 0.94, sensitivity 0.93, specificity 0.96, PPV 0.95, NPV 0.93, F1-score 0.94, and AUROC 0.98). In the gradcam image, while the first model depended on unrelated marks of radiograph, the second and third model mainly focused on the femur shaft and sciatic notch, respectively.
conclusionThe deep learning-based model showed high accuracy and reliability in screening hip diseases on plain radiographs, potentially aiding physicians in more accurately diagnosing hip conditions.
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.