Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40771941›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025

A comparative study of bone density in elderly people measured with AI and QCT.

Min Guo, Yu Zhang, XinXin Gu, Xuhui Liu, Fei Peng, Zongjun Zhang, Mei Jing, Yingxia Fu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Min GuoAffiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Yu ZhangAffiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
XinXin GuAffiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Xuhui LiuAffiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Fei PengAffiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Zongjun ZhangAffiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Mei JingAffiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.
Yingxia FuAffiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Osteoporosis, a systemic skeletal disorder characterized by deteriorated bone microarchitecture and low bone mass, poses substantial fracture risks to aging populations globally. Early detection of reduced bone mineral density (BMD) through opportunistic screening is critical for preventing fragility fractures. Although dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for diagnosing osteoporosis, many patients have not undergone screening with this technique. Therefore, developing an automated tool that can diagnose bone density through routine chest and abdominal CT examinations is highly important. With advancements in technology and the accumulation of clinical data, the role of bone density artificial intelligence (AI) in the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis is becoming increasingly significant. Objective: First to validate the diagnostic equivalence of AI-based BMD prediction against quantitative CT (QCT) reference standards, second to assess inter-device measurement consistency across multi-vendor CT systems (Siemens, GE, Philips). Ultimately, the objective is to determine the clinical utility of AI-derived BMD for osteoporosis classification. Methods: In this retrospective multicenter study, paired CT/QCT datasets from 702 patients (2019-2022) were analyzed. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of an Bone Density AI model were evaluated by comparing the predicted bone mineral density values from bone density AI with the measured values from QCT. Moreover, the consistency of lumbar spine BMD measurements between QCT and Bone Density AI on different devices was compared. Results: The AUC of Bone Density AI model in diagnosing osteoporosis was 0.822 (95% CI: 0.787-0.867, Conclusion: This multicenter study pioneers a dual-validation framework to establish the clinical validity of deep learning-based BMD prediction algorithms using routine thoracic/abdominal CT scans. Our data suggest that AI-driven BMD quantification demonstrates non-inferior diagnostic accuracy to QCT while overcoming DXA's accessibility limitations. This technology enables cost-effective, radiation-free osteoporosis screening through routine CT repurposing, particularly beneficial for resource-constrained settings.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceBMD valuesbone densityosteoporosisquantitative QCT

Identifiers

PMID40771941
PMCPMC12325224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.