SynthesisFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Artificial intelligence, explainable deep learning, and generative models for osteoporosis and bone disease prediction: a systematic review and future research roadmap.
Synthesis in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osteoporosis is a major global health burden, with considerable morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Artificial intelligence (AI) has opened new avenues for osteoporosis screening, bone mineral density quantification, fracture-risk prediction, and clinical decision support, but progress remains fragmented across machine learning, deep learning, explainable AI (XAI), generative models, and multimodal learning. This systematic review brings these strands together and identifies priority research needs for AI-based osteoporosis prediction. Following the PRISMA 2020 statement, studies were identified from Scopus and Google Scholar, published between January 2020 and the final search date of 30 June 2026, with two reviewers screening independently and resolving disagreements by consensus. Design-related risk-of-bias indicators, such as retrospective vs. prospective design, validation strategy, and reference standard, were recorded for every study; a full PROBAST, QUADAS-2, and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale appraisal is planned but not yet complete. Fifty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were synthesized narratively and descriptively, without formal meta-analysis, given substantial heterogeneity. Findings spanned five themes: classical machine learning, deep learning for imaging, explainable AI, generative models, and multimodal learning. Deep learning achieved strong predictive accuracy (AUC 0.82-0.96), XAI improved clinical interpretability, generative models helped offset data scarcity, and multimodal approaches boosted performance by combining imaging and clinical data. Key gaps remain, including limited external validation, heavy reliance on retrospective data, poor generalisability, and limited regulatory readiness. Building on these findings, this review proposes MXGNet, a multimodal, explainable, generative framework incorporating privacy-preserving federated learning, intended to guide development of robust, interpretable, clinically deployable AI tools for osteoporosis prediction.
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.