ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Explainable machine learning identifies knee morphology thresholds for arthroscopic medial meniscus posterior root tear: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
Background: Medial meniscus posterior root tear (MMPRT) is clinically important because disruption of posterior root function compromises hoop tension and load sharing, accelerating medial-compartment degeneration. Early or subtle posterior pathology may be underrecognized on MRI, highlighting the potential value of morphology-based risk awareness during MRI interpretation. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 608 patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery for knee joint injuries, including 281 patients with arthroscopically confirmed MMPRT and 327 controls without MMPRT. Demographic, clinical, and MRI-based morphologic parameters were compared in the training set. Variables identified from training-set comparisons and clinical/biomechanical relevance were used to develop 10 machine learning models, including CatBoost, Decision Tree, GBM, LightGBM, LASSO, Naive Bayes, Neural Network, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, and XGBoost. Models were evaluated with 10-fold cross-validation and an independent testing set. Explainability was assessed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), including global importance and dependence plots. Results: Training-set multivariable analysis identified older age, greater medial tibial slope (MTS), and deeper medial tibial plateau depth (MTPD) as independent factors associated with MMPRT. GBM achieved the highest AUC in the independent testing set and was selected for SHAP-based interpretation. SHAP analysis ranked age as the dominant contributor, followed by MTS and MTPD. Dependence plots suggested non-linear, threshold-like patterns in model contribution. Age showed an apparent transition from negative to positive SHAP contributions around midlife, MTS showed a threshold-like increase between approximately 6° and 8°, whereas MTPD shifted toward positive SHAP contributions around approximately 2.2-2.5 mm. Conclusion: Age was the dominant model contributor, and MTS and MTPD were independently associated with MMPRT, exhibiting non-linear patterns in SHAP-based model interpretation. These findings may help raise suspicion for MMPRT in symptomatic patients undergoing MRI, particularly when age-related and tibial plateau morphologic risk patterns are present.
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.