Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40799630›Full record

ArticleOsteoarthritis and cartilage open2025

Machine learning models for clinical and structural knee osteoarthritis prediction: Recent advancements and future directions.

Gabby B Joseph, Charles E McCulloch, Michael C Nevitt, Nancy E Lane, Sharmila Majumdar, Thomas M Link

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoarthritis and cartilage open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

6 authors.

Gabby B JosephDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Charles E McCullochDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Michael C NevittDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Nancy E LaneDepartment of Rheumatology, University of California, Davis, USA.
Sharmila MajumdarDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Thomas M LinkDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, USA.

Funding

Skeletal Biology and Biomechanics (SBB) CoreP30AR075055 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Wenhan Chang · 2019 to 2026
$7.1M
Understanding the mechanisms by which weight change affects progression of knee osteoarthritis in obese and overweight individuals: An analysis of the Osteoarthritis Initiative DatasetR01AR078917 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GABRIELLE JOSEPH, THOMAS M LINK · 2021 to 2026
$3.4M
NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR075055NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR078917
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine learning (ML), increasingly used for predictive modeling, has seen rapid growth in osteoarthritis (OA) research over the past decade. This review highlights recent advances in ML model development across four OA outcome domains: clinical, structural (radiographic and MRI-based), and surgical endpoints, each addressing different but interrelated aspects of the disease. For clinical outcomes, ML studies have focused on predicting changes in patient-reported clinical measures (e.g., pain and function). Radiographic OA has been characterized using deep learning (DL) models, and ML approaches have also been used to predict progression of Kellgren Lawrence grades and joint space narrowing. For MRI-based features, DL-based tools have been developed for automatic quantification of cartilage, bone marrow lesions, and subcutaneous fat; they have improved scalability and supported development of ML prediction models with cartilage loss outcomes. For total knee replacement outcomes, ML models have demonstrated strong performance, offering the potential for both early intervention and surgical planning. This review also discusses emerging directions for ML in OA research, including the integration of multimodal data sources, the development of interpretable and explainable ML models, and the use of automated ML to streamline model development. Future approaches may include OA subtype-specific prediction models, alignment of ML approaches with clinical workflows, and enhanced external validation to ensure generalizability. These evolving strategies underscore the growing potential of ML to improve the detection of early OA, individualized risk stratification, and personalized interventions in OA clinical care.

Indexed as

Machine learningOsteoarthritisPainPrediction modeling

Identifiers

PMID40799630
PMCPMC12341514

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.