ArticleJOR spine2025
Simulating Federated Learning to Enable Multi-Hospital Collaboration for Lumbopelvic Alignment Estimation.
Article in JOR spine, 2025. 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.
- Artificial intelligence in orthopedic regenerative medicine: from design to clinical translational pathways.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Simulating Federated Learning to Enable Multi-Hospital Collaboration for Lumbopelvic Alignment Estimation.JOR spine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate computation of radiological parameters related to spinal alignment is clinically crucial for diagnosing and managing conditions, such as adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and adult spinal deformities. Key parameters, including sacral slope, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, and lumbar lordosis, are required to assess lumbosacral alignment. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has demonstrated strong potential in automating these assessments, reducing clinician workload and improving consistency. However, AI models require large, diverse, high-quality datasets to perform reliably across different clinical settings. Privacy concerns and data ownership issues often hinder data sharing, limiting the creation of centralized datasets. Methods: In this study, we demonstrate that federated learning (FL) enables the training of deep learning models across four hospitals without compromising patient privacy. In particular, we compared FL against a centralized approach, where data from all the hospitals are pooled together and a model is trained on them, and a local approach consisting of training individual models exclusively on data from each respective hospital, resulting in distinct hospital-specific models. Results: FL achieved performance comparable to centralized training (errors ~5°), where data is pooled, and consistently outperformed models trained on data from individual hospitals, both in internal (~8°) and external (~10°) testing. Conclusion: This work highlights FL as a viable solution for collaborative AI development in spinal imaging, facilitating the use of diverse, multi-institutional data while circumventing privacy barriers and complex data-sharing agreements. Additionally, FL demonstrates particular benefits for smaller hospitals, enabling them to achieve superior model performance by effectively leveraging data from hospitals with larger datasets.
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.