ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
Artificial Intelligence-Based Prediction of Prognosis After Nonsurgical Treatment for Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Tear.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Medial meniscus posterior root tear (MMPRT) is recognized as one of the leading causes of knee osteoarthritis. Given the detrimental effects of MMPRT on knee kinematics and the associated clinical consequences, substantial efforts have been directed toward improving the understanding and management of MMPRT. Purpose: To develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI)-based prediction model for patient-specific risk assessment of clinical failure at 2 and 5 years after nonsurgical treatment of MMPRT. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed a prospectively collected database of 233 patients who underwent nonsurgical treatment for MMPRT between 2006 and 2020. Patient descriptive characteristics, clinical data, and imaging variables were evaluated for their association with clinical failure, defined as conversion to total knee arthroplasty or corrective osteotomy at 2- and 5-year follow-up. Five conventional machine learning models, including Elastic Net logistic regression, multilayer perceptron, support vector machine, random forest, and Extreme Gradient Boosting, as well as a proposed deep learning model, the Grouped Graph Attention (GGAT) network, were developed and internally validated to predict clinical failure. Results: During follow-up, clinical failure occurred in 36 of 233 patients (15.5%) at 2 years and in 54 of 233 patients (23.2%) at 5 years. The deep learning-based GGAT model demonstrated better overall predictive performance compared with conventional machine learning models at both the 2- and 5-year follow-up, with test set accuracy of 0.83 to 0.91, precision of 0.87 to 0.91, sensitivity of 0.92 to 1.00, F1 score of 0.89 to 0.95, Brier score of 0.09 to 0.16, and areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.69 to 0.77. The most influential predictors of clinical failure included baseline mechanical hip-knee-ankle angle, symptom duration, body mass index, age, bone marrow edema, lateral distal femoral angle, subchondral insufficiency fracture of the knee, cartilage lesion, effusion grade, and medial proximal tibial angle. Conclusion: The deep learning-based GGAT network demonstrated accurate prediction of clinical failure at both 2 and 5 years after nonsurgical treatment of MMPRT. These findings underscore the potential value of deep learning-based risk assessment in supporting clinical decision-making and patient counseling.
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.