ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2025
Artificial intelligence for diagnosing rare bone diseases: a global survey of healthcare professionals.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 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 in Clinical Genetics: Current Applications and Challenges.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRare bone diseases (RBDs) are an important group of conditions characterized by abnormalities in bone and cartilage. Their large number, individual rarity, and heterogeneity make accurate and timely diagnosis challenging. Establishing correlations between genotype and phenotype (mainly via imaging) is critical for diagnosing RBDs. Image recognition artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to significantly improve the diagnostic process by assisting healthcare providers to identify and differentiate imaging patterns associated with various RBDs. This survey study sought to assess the interest of various healthcare providers worldwide in utilizing an AI-based assistant tool for the differential diagnosis of RBDs.
methodSurvey data were collected from March to September 2024. The survey was performed online and the link was disseminated via direct email, newsletters, and flyers at scientific talks and conferences.
resultsWe received 103 completed surveys, representing respondents from 27 different countries covering most global regions, but mostly from Europe, the United States, and Canada. The majority of the participants are physicians (n = 92, 89%) and primarily work at academic medical centers (n = 84, 81%). While each participant could select multiple specialties, the most frequent clinician types were medical geneticists, pediatricians, and endocrinologists, accounting for 71 (69%) of the respondents. Ninety-four (91%) of the respondents find imaging to be very or extremely important, and the majority (n = 84, 81%) consider X-rays to be the most important imaging modality. Although around half of the participants (n = 45) have concerns about AI-related errors and consider the explainability of AI algorithms to be very (42/103) or extremely (9/103) important, 81% of the respondents report that they are somewhat (n = 39) or extremely (n = 45) likely to consider integrating image recognition AI into their current diagnostic workflow.
conclusionsMost survey participants are open to integrating image recognition AI into their RBD diagnostic workflow. However, concerns about AI-related errors, privacy, and model interpretability highlight the importance of transparent collaboration between developers and healthcare professionals throughout the development process to ensure that such technologies are clinically trustworthy and practically adoptable.
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.