ArticleYonsei medical journal2025
Deep Learning-Based Landmark Detection Model for Multiple Foot Deformity Classification: A Dual-Center Study.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo introduce heatmap-in-heatmap (HIH)-based model for automated diagnosis of foot deformities using weight-bearing foot radiographs, aiming to address the labor-intensive and variable nature of manual diagnosis. MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom January 2004 to September 2022, a dual-center retrospective study was conducted. In the first center, 1561 anterior-posterior (AP) and 1536 lateral images from 806 patients were used for model training, while 374 AP and 373 lateral images from 196 patients were allocated to the validation set. For external validation at the second center, 527 AP and 529 lateral images from 270 patients were allocated. Five deformities were diagnosed using four and three angles between the predicted landmarks in the AP and lateral images, respectively. The results were compared with those of the baseline model (FlatNet).
resultsThe HIH model demonstrated robust performance in diagnosing multiple foot deformities. On the test set, it outperformed FlatNet with higher accuracy (FlatNet vs. HIH: 78.9% vs. 85.1%), sensitivity (78.9% vs. 84.1%), specificity (79.0% vs. 85.9%), positive predictive value (77.3% vs. 84.4%), and negative predictive value (80.5% vs. 85.7%). Additionally, HIH exhibited significantly lower absolute pixel and angle errors, lower normalized mean errors, higher successful detection rate, faster training and inference speeds, and fewer parameters.
conclusionThe HIH model showed robust performance in diagnosing multiple foot deformities with high efficacy in internal and external validation. Our approach is expected to be effective for various tasks using landmarks in medical imaging.
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.