ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Comparison of multistage and single-stage framework for automated landmark localization and radiologic measurement: a case of the C1-2 complex on cervical spine lateral radiographs.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 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
backgroundDespite recent advances, applying deep learning to X-rays remains challenging due to the need for substantial downsampling and limited dataset sizes. While multistage frameworks have been proposed to promote stable performance, their advantages over single-stage designs remain unclear. This study aims to systematically compare the two designs for analyzing the C1-2 complex on cervical spine lateral radiographs.
methodsA total of 1200 dynamic cervical spine X-ray and MRI pairs were collected from a tertiary care institution, and 300 studies from another institution were set aside for external validation. Two deep learning-based frameworks for localizing 8 landmarks and measuring 14 radiologic indices of the C1-2 complex were developed. The first of which is a multistage pipeline that implements coarse-to-fine localization, and the other is a single-stage model that processes full-region images. Five-fold cross-validation and an anatomy-aware multi-term loss were implemented, and performance was compared in terms of localization, segmentation, and measurement accuracy.
resultsThe multistage framework demonstrated significantly smaller errors for the localization of the basion and C2 landmarks on the test sets (p < 0.001). For vertebral segmentation, the multistage framework achieved better performance (p < 0.001), yielding DSC and IoU of over 0.90 and 0.80, respectively. Radiologic measurements were more precise with the multistage design, exhibiting mean errors of 1–2° for angular measurements and 0.5–1.5 mm for distance measurements.
conclusionsWe demonstrate that the multistage framework can consistently achieve superior performance over single-stage counterparts in analyzing cervical spine radiographs. It is expected to provide evidence for architectural design when developing deep learning models for the analysis of musculoskeletal imaging studies. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.