ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Development of a multi-task deep learning system for classification of nine common knee abnormalities on MRI: a large-scale, multicentre, stepwise validation study.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Infrapatellar Fat Pad in Osteoarthritis: From Pathophysiology to a Novel Therapeutic Target.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- fNIRS-Based characterization of adolescent depression using dynamic functional connectivity biomarkers in a verbal fluency task.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A comprehensive MRI-based assessment of multiple knee abnormalities is essential for guiding treatment decisions. However, knee MRI interpretation is time-consuming and prone to errors. Our study aimed to develop a deep learning system (DLS) for classifying multiple common knee abnormalities and to systematically validate its capacity in improving radiologists' diagnostic performance across multiple centres. Methods: In this multicentre study, we collected patients with knee MRI across scanners from various MRI vendors from five different centres (Centre A, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University; Centre B, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of South China University of Technology; Centre C, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University; Centre D, The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University; and Centre E, Foshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine) between January 1, 2010 and May 31, 2022. The reference standard for knee abnormalities was established through the consensus of three musculoskeletal radiologists, based on MRI images and corresponding radiology reports. A total of 12,825 patients from Centre A were split into the training (n = 8891), validation (n = 1326), and internal test (n = 2608) sets in a 7:1:2 ratio. Patients from Centre B (n = 450) constituted the external test set I, while patients from Centres C (n = 36), D (n = 44), and E (n = 64) were combined for external test set II (n = 144). The DLS was developed with an attention-guided coarse-to-fine approach to classify nine knee abnormalities using proton density-weighted with fat suppression images in axial, coronal, and sagittal planes. This classification included primary abnormalities (meniscal tear, cartilage defect, and anterior cruciate ligament [ACL] tear) and secondary abnormalities (posterior cruciate ligament injury, medial collateral ligament [MCL] injury, lateral collateral ligament injury, infrapatellar fat pad injury, synovial plica, and cyst). A three-step validation was performed for the DLS involving 12 radiologists with varying experience levels from six geographically different hospitals (Tianhe District [Guangzhou]; Yuexiu District [Guangzhou]; Rongcheng District [Jieyang]; Nanhai District [Foshan]; Longgang District [Shenzhen]; and Wuchang District [Wuhan]) in China. Findings: This large-scale study included 13,419 patients comprising 14,962 MRI examinations for the development and validation of the DLS. The DLS demonstrated areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of 0.898 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.890-0.905) and 0.815 (95% CI, 0.805-0.823), 0.852 (95% CI, 0.830-0.872) and 0.744 (95% CI, 0.721-0.766), and 0.812 (95% CI, 0.771-0.854) and 0.774 (95% CI, 0.733-0.816) for primary and secondary abnormalities on the internal test set, external test set I, and external test set II, respectively. For step 1 of validation, the DLS demonstrated comparable accuracy to that of the senior radiologists in classifying meniscal tear (79.6% vs. 78.1%, p = 0.426), ACL tear (89.3% vs. 89.4%, p = 1.000), and MCL injury (87.1% vs. 85.7%, p = 0.565). For step 2, the multi-reader multi-case study showed that the DLS comprehensively improved classification performance of junior (net reclassification indices [NRIs], 0.0446-0.1756, all p < 0.05) and senior radiologists (NRIs, 0.0487-0.1724, all p < 0.05) for nine knee abnormalities. For step 3, the randomised comparative study demonstrated that the junior and senior radiologists in the DLS-assisted group achieved significantly higher accuracy (difference of 4.8-8.8% and 4.2-8.2%, all p < 0.05) and reduced reading time (by 35.5 and 30.7 s, all p < 0.05) compared to the control group for nine knee abnormalities. Interpretation: This DLS demonstrated an ability to classify nine distinct knee abnormalities on MRI. When utilised alongside radiologists, classification results were accurate and performance were improved. Future prospective multi-national studies should be sought to assess this tool in real-world clinical settings. Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81871510, No. 82172014), the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (No. 2023A1515011318), and the Health Bureau of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (No. 20211021).
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.