ArticleScientific reports2025
Clinical validation of a deep learning tool for characterizing spinopelvic mobility in total hip arthroplasty.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiographic measurement of patient-specific spinopelvic mobility is standard-of-care in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Current manual methods are time-consuming, subjective, and error-prone. This study utilized deep learning (DL) to classify functional positions and measure pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS) and lumbar lordotic angle (LLA). A DL pipeline integrating image classification, vertebra detection, and landmark detection was developed using data from an international joint registry, comprising 52,772 images for classification, 9,875 for object detection, and 25,249 for landmark detection. Performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), F1 score, and mean absolute error (MAE). Accuracy was compared to annotations by three expert engineers and validated by two senior engineers and a surgeon. Radiographs were processed in 1.96 ± 0.04 s, achieving precision, recall, Receiver-operator-characteristic-AUC, and Precision-Recall-AUC metrics above 0.994. Anatomical landmark predictions resulted in errors of: PT: 1.6°±2.1°, SS: 3.3°±2.6°, LLA: 4.2°±3.2°. There was no significant difference in PT and LLA between expert engineers and the DL pipeline, and 0.5° difference in SS (p = 0.043). Clinical validation showed no difference in landmark rejection rates (p > 0.05). We developed and clinically validated a DL pipeline that accurately measures patient-specific spinopelvic mobility from lateral functional radiographs, providing a scalable method for routine characterization in THA patients.
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.