ArticleHormones (Athens, Greece)2026
Artificial intelligence vs human opportunistic detection of vertebral fractures in routine CT scans: results of a pilot study.
Article in Hormones (Athens, Greece), 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVertebral fractures (VFs) are the most common osteoporotic fractures and a hallmark of bone fragility, yet most morphometric VFs remain undiagnosed in routine imaging not focused on the spine. This pilot study evaluated the diagnostic performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) system for opportunistic vertebral fracture detection in chest and abdominal computer tomography (CT) scans compared with human readers in a real-world hospital setting.
methodsOver 2 months, all thoracic and abdominal CTs performed for any indication in patients aged ≥ 50 years at a tertiary hospital were analyzed by the Bone Solution HealthOST AI platform (Nanox AI Ltd.). Routine radiology reports and targeted reviews by endocrinologists were compared to AI outputs using a gold-standard adjudication by an expert panel. Given that all readers assessed the same cases, paired comparisons between AI and human readers were performed using McNemar’s test, with chi-square analyses conducted as secondary comparisons.
resultsAmong 427 eligible CT scans, AI detected vertebral fractures with significantly higher sensitivity (86.3%) than radiologists (50.0%) or endocrinologists (68.8%) (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). Compared with radiologists, AI had 6.3-fold greater odds of correctly identifying true fractures (OR = 6.30; 95% CI: 2.90–13.58), while against targeted review by endocrinologists, AI achieved a 2.85-fold advantage (OR = 2.85; 95% CI: 1.29–6.30). Extrapolated annually, AI integration could uncover around 150 new, otherwise undiagnosed patients eligible for osteoporosis treatment.
conclusionAutomated vertebral fracture detection in routine CT scans significantly enhances diagnostic yield versus human interpretation. Its integration into clinical workflows offers a low-cost, high-impact strategy to improve early osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment within the healthcare system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42026417What 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.