ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Enhanced Detection Performance of Acute Vertebral Compression Fractures Using a Hybrid Deep Learning and Traditional Quantitative Measurement Approach: Beyond the Limitations of Genant Classification.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluated the applicability of the classical method, height loss ratio (HLR), for identifying major acute compression fractures in clinical practice and compared its performance with deep learning (DL)-based VCF detection methods. Additionally, it examined whether combining the HLR with DL approaches could enhance performance, exploring the potential integration of classical and DL methodologies.
methodsEnd-to-End VCF Detection (EEVD), Two-Stage VCF Detection with Segmentation and Detection (TSVD_SD), and Two-Stage VCF Detection with Detection and Classification (TSVD_DC). The models were evaluated on a dataset of 589 patients, focusing on sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and precision.
resultsTSVD_SD outperformed all other methods, achieving the highest sensitivity (84.46%) and accuracy (95.05%), making it particularly effective for identifying true positives. The complementary use of DL methods with HLR further improved detection performance. For instance, combining HLR-negative cases with TSVD_SD increased sensitivity to 87.84%, reducing missed fractures, while combining HLR-positive cases with EEVD achieved the highest specificity (99.77%), minimizing false positives.
conclusionThese findings demonstrated that DL-based approaches, particularly TSVD_SD, provided robust alternatives or complements to traditional methods, significantly enhancing diagnostic accuracy for acute VCFs in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.