ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Automated classification of shoulder radiology focusing on cuff tear arthropathy and glenoid erosion using AI.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent advancements in the field artificial intelligence (AI), particularly in the architecture of convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture, have revolutionized medical imaging by enabling accurate image recognition. However, the application of AI in identifying degenerative musculoskeletal disorders, specifically on plain radiographs, is still poorly explored. The aim of this study is to classify cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) and glenoid erosion using AI on plain shoulder radiographs, using the Hamada and Favard classification systems.
methodsWe used a publicly available CNN trained for image recognition and trained it using a diverse dataset of 6733 shoulder and clavicle X-ray images covering various clinical conditions. The performance of the network was evaluated in detail on a validation set of 561 images. Metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, Youden's index, and Area Under Curve (AUC) in the receiver operating characteristics curve analysis, were used for evaluation. AUC was the primary measure of accuracy.
resultsThe network showed exceptional performance in identifying Hamada grades 3 and 4, achieving AUCs of 0.95, 95% CI [0.91-0.98] for both categories. While performance was slightly lower for Hamada grades 0-2 and glenoid erosion, with AUCs ranging from 0.81 to 0.91, it still demonstrated considerable accuracy. Similar results were obtained for Favard although we could not validate the network for more advanced stages due to lack of data.
conclusionsOur study demonstrates the network's robust capability to identify CTA on plain radiographs, comparable to earlier studies focused on osteoarthritis. Notably, the network excelled in later disease stages characterized by pronounced pathology. The ability to achieve such performance with a heterogeneous dataset bodes well for the real-world implementation of AI technology. However, it is crucial to acknowledge the potential influence of using a validation set instead of a dedicated test set, warranting further investigation.
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.