Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42180399›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2026

Validation of a deep learning model for bone fragility detection from conventional radiographs: an international cohort study.

Guillaume Gatineau, Michele De Gruttola, Karen Hind, Madeleine Davies, Diane Krueger, Neil Binkley, Martin Kužma, Juraj Payer, Giuseppe Guglielmi, Astrid Fahrleitner-Pammer and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Guillaume GatineauRheumatology Unit, Bone and Joint Department, Centre of Bone Diseases, Lausanne University Hospital & University of Lausanne, Switzerland.
Michele De GruttolaMedimaps Group, Plan les Ouates, Geneva, Switzerland.
Karen HindMedimaps Group, Plan les Ouates, Geneva, Switzerland.
Madeleine DaviesMedimaps Group, Plan les Ouates, Geneva, Switzerland.
Diane KruegerSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, USA.
Neil BinkleySchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, USA.
Martin KužmaComenius University Faculty of Medicine, 5th Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Juraj PayerComenius University Faculty of Medicine, 5th Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Giuseppe GuglielmiDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Foggia University School of Medicine, Italy.
Astrid Fahrleitner-PammerDivision for Endocrinology and Diabetology, Department for Internal Medicine, Medical University Graz, Austria.
Kwang ChunDepartment of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA.
Jenny BencardinoDepartment of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA.
Alain ShermanDepartment of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA.
Kai JonesDepartment of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA.
Didier HansRheumatology Unit, Bone and Joint Department, Centre of Bone Diseases, Lausanne University Hospital & University of Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based opportunistic risk stratification solutions can help to counter rising fragility fracture rates. Existing tools estimate bone mineral density (BMD) alone, while the present study incorporates trabecular bone score (TBS), a surrogate of bone microarchitecture, more closely mirroring fracture pathophysiology. We aimed to evaluate the performance of an AI tool that estimates bone fragility directly from standard radiographs to identify individuals at highest risk of fracture. Methods: This retrospective, multinational cohort study included 18,858 paired radiographs and lumbar spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans from adult patients (aged at least 20 years) from three clinical sites in Europe and two sites in the United States. Routine clinical radiographs of the spine, abdomen, chest, or pelvis acquired in the anteroposterior or posteroanterior view and including visualisation of the lumbar spine were included. Eligible radiographs had an in-plane spatial resolution of ≤0.2 mm per pixel, independent of vendor, and had a corresponding DXA examination within 6 months, and included at least two lumbar vertebrae (L1-L4). The AI model training used a composite Bone Fragility Index, combining TBS and BMD. Training, internal validation and testing was performed on two European sites (n = 10,692; Italy and Austria); and external validation involved three sites with ethnically diverse populations (n = 7079): Slovakia, US site 1 (Wisconsin) and US site 2 (New York). Model performance for identifying very high bone fragility (characterised by degraded TBS and osteoporosis) prioritised specificity (as per the intended clinical use to prioritise low false-positive rates) and was evaluated with accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, AUC and precision. Findings: Between Jan 1, 2010 and Dec 31, 2023, 18,858 paired radiographs and lumbar spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans from 11,138 participants across five international sites were retrospectively aggregated. Internal testing on two European sites demonstrated an accuracy of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.78, 0.92), specificity of 0.93 (0.85, 0.99), and sensitivity of 0.53 (0.41, 0.67). External testing on three sites demonstrated consistently high specificity of 0.88 (0.77, 0.99) in the European cohort, 0.94 (0.91, 0.97) in the American White dataset, and 0.96 (0.81, 0.99) in the American Non-White. External sensitivity ranged from 0.53 (0.41, 0.67) to 0.64 (0.50, 0.88). Interpretation: The proposed approach provides rapid identification of individuals with very high bone fragility from routine radiographs. Its specificity across diverse populations supports clinical use for opportunistic osteoporosis screening in real-world settings. Future work should assess the model's performance in more sex-balanced cohorts without prior DXA assessment, and evaluate its ability to predict incident fractures. Funding: The Swiss National Science Foundation, the Foundation of the Orthopaedic Hospital of the Vaudois University Hospital (Lausanne, Switzerland), and Medimaps Group SA, Switzerland.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceDeep-learningOpportunisticOsteoporosisRadiology

Identifiers

PMID42180399
PMCPMC13196392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.