ArticleRMD open2025
Automated ultrasound system ARTHUR V.2.0 with AI analysis DIANA V.2.0 matches expert rheumatologist in hand joint assessment of rheumatoid arthritis patients.
Article in RMD open, 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.
- Automated ultrasound with AI for osteophyte grading in hand osteoarthritis: comparison with expert rheumatologist assessment.BMC rheumatology · 2026Article
- Toward Precision Health in Autoimmunity and Immune-Related Adverse Events: The Autoantibody Reactome, Spatial Omics, and Multimodal Data Integration.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Review
- Advancing artificial intelligence in rheumatology from evidence to practice.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the agreement and repeatability of an automated robotic ultrasound system (ARTHUR V.2.0) combined with an AI model (DIANA V.2.0) in assessing synovial hypertrophy (SH) and Doppler activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, using an expert rheumatologist's assessment as the reference standard.
methods30 RA patients underwent two consecutive ARTHUR V.2.0 scans and rheumatologist assessment of 22 hand joints, with the rheumatologist blinded to the automated system's results. Images were scored for SH and Doppler by DIANA V.2.0 using the EULAR-OMERACT scale (0-3). The agreement was evaluated by weighted Cohen's kappa, percent exact agreement (PEA), percent close agreement (PCA) and binary outcomes using Global OMERACT-EULAR Synovitis Scoring (healthy ≤1 vs diseased ≥2). Comparisons included intra-robot repeatability and agreement with the expert rheumatologist and a blinded independent assessor.
resultsARTHUR successfully scanned 564 out of 660 joints, corresponding to an overall success rate of 85.5%. Intra-robot agreement for SH: PEA 63.0%, PCA 93.0%, binary 90.5% and for Doppler, PEA 74.8%, PCA 93.7%, binary 88.1% and kappa values of 0.54 and 0.49. Agreement between ARTHUR+DIANA and the rheumatologist: SH (PEA 57.9%, PCA 92.9%, binary 87.3%, kappa 0.38); Doppler (PEA 77.3%, PCA 94.2%, binary 91.2%, kappa 0.44) and with the independent assessor: SH (PEA 49.0%, PCA 91.2%, binary 80.0%, kappa 0.39); Doppler (PEA 62.6%, PCA 94.4%, binary 88.1%, kappa 0.48).
conclusionsARTHUR V.2.0 and DIANA V.2.0 demonstrated repeatability on par with intra-expert agreement reported in the literature and showed encouraging agreement with human assessors, though further refinement is needed to optimise performance across specific joints.
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.