ArticleCurrent medical science2026
Automatic Classification of Anterior Talofibular Ligament Based on 2D Convolutional Neural Network.
Article in Current medical science, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the feasibility of 2D convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in the automatic classification of anterior talofibular ligaments (ATFLs) on MR images.
methodsA total of 560 transverse T2-weighted MR images of the ATFL were collected from Center A, and 96 from Center B; manual segmentation of the ATFL was performed. The ATFL segmentation model was trained on YOLO11 and was validated on images from Center B. The dice similarity coefficient (DSC) between manual and automatic segmentation was calculated. A total of 1,103 T2-weighted MR images of the ATFL were further collected from Center C and divided into three groups: normal, partial, and total tear, and ATFL was automatically segmented for all the images. The 2D ResNet model was then trained for ATFL classification. Finally, the segmentation model and classification model were applied to 420 images from Center D.
resultsThe median DSC for the YOLO11 segmentation model was 0.95. For Center D data, the automatic workflow achieved an accuracy of 92.6% (389/420). It showed 95.0% (190/200) sensitivity and 93.6% (206/220) specificity for abnormal ATFL detection, slightly below the junior radiologist's 97.0% (194/200) sensitivity and 95.5% (210/220) specificity, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.22). Automatic classification of the Center D dataset took 3 minutes, compared with manual 14 minutes for the junior radiologist.
conclusionAutomatic segmentation and classification of ATFL on MR images based on CNNs are feasible for evaluating ATFL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42545568What 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.