ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2025
External Validation of a Winning Artificial Intelligence Algorithm from the RSNA 2022 Cervical Spine Fracture Detection Challenge.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence for identification of cervical spine fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Emergency radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Defining pediatric cervical spine clearance with computed tomography: A prospective observational study by the Western Pediatric Surgery Research Consortium and Western Trauma Association.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2026Observational
- SpineMAE: A bone-window self-supervised and structure-aware framework for 3D cervical vertebra segmentation and fracture classification.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Article
- Are AI Neuroimaging Models Ready for Clinical Use? A Systematic Methodological Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in orthopedic regenerative medicine: from design to clinical translational pathways.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Assessing the generalizability of artificial intelligence in radiology: a systematic review of performance across different clinical settings.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Intelligence Architectures and Machine Learning Applications in Contemporary Spine Care.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in musculoskeletal radiology: practical aspects and latest perspectives.BJR open · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe Radiological Society of North America has actively promoted artificial intelligence (AI) challenges since 2017. Algorithms emerging from the recent RSNA 2022 Cervical Spine Fracture Detection Challenge demonstrated state-of-the-art performance in the competition's data set, surpassing results from prior publications. However, their performance in real-world clinical practice is not known. As an initial step toward the goal of assessing feasibility of these models in clinical practice, we conducted a generalizability test by using one of the leading algorithms of the competition. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe deep learning algorithm was selected due to its performance, portability, and ease of use, and installed locally. One hundred examinations (50 consecutive cervical spine CT scans with at least 1 fracture present and 50 consecutive negative CT scans) from a level 1 trauma center not represented in the competition data set were processed at 6.4 seconds per examination. Ground truth was established based on the radiology report with retrospective confirmation of positive fracture cases. Sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, and area under the curve were calculated.
resultsThe external validation data set comprised older patients in comparison to the competition set (53.5 ± 21.8 years versus 58 ± 22.0, respectively;
conclusionsThe model performed with a similar sensitivity on the test and external data set, suggesting that such a tool could be potentially generalizable as a triage tool in the emergency setting. Discordant factors such as age-associated comorbidities may affect accuracy and specificity of AI models when used in certain populations. Further research should be encouraged to help elucidate the potential contributions and pitfalls of these algorithms in supporting clinical 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.