ArticleScientific reports2025
Automated radiography assessment of ankle joint instability using deep learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
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
Abstract
This study developed and evaluated a deep learning (DL)-based system for automatically measuring talar tilt and anterior talar translation on weight-bearing ankle radiographs, which are key parameters in diagnosing ankle joint instability. The system was trained and tested using a dataset comprising of 1,452 anteroposterior radiographs (mean age ± standard deviation [SD]: 43.70 ± 22.60 years; age range: 6-87 years; males: 733, females: 719) and 2,984 lateral radiographs (mean age ± SD: 44.37 ± 22.72 years; age range: 6-92 years; male: 1,533, female: 1,451) from a total of 4,000 patients, provided by the National Information Society Agency. Patients who underwent joint fusion, bone grafting, or joint replacement were excluded. Statistical analyses, including correlation coefficient analysis and Bland-Altman plots, were conducted to assess the agreement and consistency between the DL-calculated and clinician-assessed measurements. The system demonstrated high accuracy, with strong correlations for talar tilt (Pearson correlation coefficient [r] = 0.798 (p < .001); intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.797 [95% CI 0.74, 0.82]; concordance correlation coefficient [CCC] = 0.796 [95% CI 0.69, 0.85]; mean absolute error [MAE] = 1.088° [95% CI 0.06°, 1.14°]; mean square error [MSE] = 1.780° [95% CI 1.69°, 2.73°]; root mean square error [RMSE] = 1.374° [95% CI 1.31°, 1.44°]; 95% limit of agreement [LoA], 2.0° to - 2.3°) and anterior talar translation (r = .862 (p < .001); ICC = 0.861 [95% CI 0.84, 0.89]; CCC = 0.861 [95% CI 0.86, 0.89]; MAE = 0.468 mm [95% CI 0.42 mm, 0.51 mm]; MSE = 0.551 mm [95% CI 0.49 mm, 0.61 mm]; RMSE = 0.742 mm [95% CI 0.69 mm, 0.79 mm]; 95% LoA, 1.5 mm to - 1.3 mm). These results demonstrate the system's capability to provide objective and reproducible measurements, supporting clinical interpretation of ankle instability in routine radiographic practice.
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.