ArticleEuropean radiology2026
Comprehensive deep learning-assisted multi-condition analysis of knee MRI studies improves resident radiologist performance.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesDeveloping a deep-learning model for automated multi-tissue, multi-condition knee MRI analysis and assessing its clinical potential. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis retrospective dual-center study included 3121 MRI studies from 3018 adults, who underwent routine knee MRI examinations at a radiologic practice (2012-2019). Twenty-three conditions across cartilage, menisci, bone marrow, ligaments, and other soft tissues were manually labeled. A 3D slice transformer network was trained for binary classification and evaluated in terms of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity using a five-fold cross-validation and an external test set of 448 MRI studies (429 adults) from a university hospital (2022-2023). To assess differences in diagnostic performance, two inexperienced and two experienced radiology residents read 50 external test studies with and without model assistance. Paired t-tests were used for statistical analysis.
resultsAveraged over cross-validation tests, the model's AUC was at least 0.85 for 8 conditions and at least 0.75 for 18 conditions. Generalization on the external test set was robust, with a mean absolute AUC difference of 0.05 ± 0.03 per condition. Model assistance improved accuracy and sensitivity for inexperienced residents, increased inter-reader agreement for both groups, and increased sensitivity and shortened reading times by 10% (p = 0.045) for experienced residents. Specificity decreased slightly when conditions with low model performance (AUC < 0.75) were included.
conclusionOur deep-learning model performed well across diverse knee conditions and effectively assisted radiology residents. Future work should focus on more fine-grained predictions for subtle or rare conditions to enable comprehensive joint assessment in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: Question Increasing MRI utilization adds pressure on radiologists, necessitating comprehensive AI models for image analysis to manage this growing demand efficiently. Findings Our AI model enhanced diagnostic performance and efficiency of resident radiologists when reading knee MRI studies, demonstrating robust results across diverse conditions and two datasets. Clinical relevance Model assistance increases the sensitivity of radiologists, helping to identify pathologies that were overlooked without AI assistance. Reduced reading times suggest potential alleviation of radiologists' workload.
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.