ArticleJBMR plus2026
Automated neural network femur segmentation performance in computed tomography images of older adults with obesity.
Article in JBMR plus, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Femur segmentation is a precursor to image analysis pipelines that evaluate hip bone measures with subject-specific finite element models, but historically required time-intensive efforts of operators. Implementing deep learning techniques offers a promising pathway for rapid, automated, and accurate segmentation. This study evaluates the feasibility of using a convolutional neural network (CNN) developed and validated for femur segmentation of Icelandic older adults to segment femurs in a sample of 166 CT scans of older adults with obesity in the United States. The performance of the segmentation model was quantitatively evaluated against manually segmented ground truth data using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and the 95% Hausdorff distance (HD95), and qualitatively evaluated using manual image review. The mean DSC was 0.974 ± 0.009 and mean HD95 for the foreground was 1.078 ± 0.41 mm, indicating excellent segmentation quality. The CNN segmentation model averaged 32 ± 3 s for each mask prediction. Visual inspection revealed segmentations with minor errors in delineating boundaries at the femoral head and detecting osteophytes, requiring refinement during post-processing. The present CNN, when evaluated on this dataset of older adults with obesity, produced femur segmentations with improved quality and speed compared to manual segmentation. Additional model training with a more diverse training dataset could help further minimize manual intervention that is currently required during pre- and postprocessing. This study demonstrates the potential for femur segmentation CNN models to be applicable to diverse clinical 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.