ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Deep learning for identifying cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning based predictive analytics in cervical myelopathy - a scoping review.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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) is a significant contributor for unintentional durotomy following anterior spinal surgery, neural compression, and cervical myelopathy. While traditional diagnostic methods like plain radiography are commonly used, they may yield false negatives. The diagnostic accuracy and reliability of artificial intelligence methods for detecting this condition remain largely unexplored. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the performance of deep learning models (DLMs) in diagnosing and predicting cervical OPLL. Methods: This systematic review assesses the utilization of DLMs in diagnosing and predicting OPLL. Inclusion criteria were defined as the use of DLM for the diagnosis and prediction of cervical OPLL in adult patients. Databases included PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and BASE. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Results: Seven studies with a pooled sample size of 3,373 patients were included. The pooled accuracy, area under the curve, sensitivity, and accuracy are 0.93, 0.92, 0.88, and 0.9. DLM demonstrated superior diagnostic performance, outperforming human comparator groups in terms of sensitivity (0.86 Conclusions: Despite limitations in methodological variations and deep learning challenges, the findings support integrating these models into diagnostic protocols. Their robust performance suggests potential value in clinical practice, offering improved diagnostic accuracy and enhanced subtype differentiation.
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.