SynthesisBMC medical imaging2025
Deep learning-based evaluation of panoramic radiographs for osteoporosis screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medical imaging, 2025. 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.
- AI-Based Detection of Osteoporosis on Dental Radiographs: Influence of Region-of-Interest Selection on Classification Performance.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Rheumatology: From Algorithms to Clinical Impact in Osteoporosis and Chronic Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Osteoporosis Diagnosis, Risk Prediction and Therapy: Current Advances, Clinical Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Review
- A Logistic Regression Model for Predicting Osteoporosis Using Alveolar Bone Mineral Density Measured on Intraoral Radiographs Combined with Panoramic Mandibular Cortical Index.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOsteoporosis is a complex condition that drives research into its causes, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention, significantly affecting patients and healthcare providers in various aspects of life. Research is exploring orthopantomogram (OPG) radiography for osteoporosis screening instead of bone mineral density (BMD) assessments. Although this method uses various indicators, manual analysis can be challenging. Machine learning and deep learning techniques have been developed to address this. This systematic review and meta-analysis is the first to evaluate the accuracy of deep learning models in predicting osteoporosis from OPG radiographs, providing evidence for their performance and clinical use.
methodsA literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science up to February 10, 2025, using the keywords related to deep learning, osteoporosis, and panoramic radiography. We conducted title, abstract, and full-text screening based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was performed using a bivariate random-effects model to pool diagnostic accuracy measures, and subgroup analyses explored sources of heterogeneity.
resultsWe found 204 articles, removed 189 duplicates and irrelevant studies, assessed 15articles, and ultimately, seven studies were selected. The DL models showed AUC values of 66.8-99.8%, with sensitivity and specificity ranging from 59 to 97% and 64.9-100%, respectively. No significant differences in diagnostic accuracy were found among subgroups. AlexNet had the highest performance, achieving a sensitivity of 0.89 and a specificity of 0.99. Sensitivity analysis revealed that excluding outliers had little impact on the results. Deeks' funnel plot indicated no significant publication bias (P = 0.54).
conclusionsThis systematic review indicates that deep learning models for osteoporosis diagnosis achieved 80% sensitivity, 92% specificity, and 93% AUC. Models like AlexNet and ResNet demonstrate effectiveness. These findings suggest that DL models are promising for noninvasive early detection, but more extensive multicenter studies are necessary to validate their efficacy in at-risk groups.
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.