ArticleScientific reports2026
Magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of knee injuries after skiing in adolescents under deep learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To address the issues of subjectivity, low efficiency, and missed diagnoses of subtle injuries in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnosis of knee injuries after skiing in adolescents, a precise automatic diagnostic model was constructed to achieve simultaneous segmentation and classification of different types of injuries. A hybrid model combining U-Net + + and DenseNet121 was employed. U-Net + + performed pixel-level segmentation of injured areas, while DenseNet121 classified the injuries based on fused features. The model was trained using a dataset of 309 adolescent MRI scans through a joint loss function and transfer learning strategy. In the segmentation task, the average Dice coefficient (DC) was 0.89, and the intersection over union (IoU) was 0.82. The highest accuracy was achieved for meniscus tears (0.93, 0.87) and anterior cruciate ligament injuries (0.89, 0.82). Cartilage injuries (0.84, 0.77) showed a 6.4% improvement compared to the original U-Net. In the classification task, the average accuracy was 0.90, the F1-score was 0.91, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.95. The recall rate for meniscus tears was 0.93, with a precision of 0.94, and the recall rate for cartilage injuries was 0.87. These results were significantly higher than those of SVM + handcrafted features (F1 = 0.77) and ResNet50 (F1 = 0.85) (P < 0.01). The model can efficiently and accurately perform automatic diagnosis of multiple injury types on MRI scans, outperforming traditional methods. It reduces the rate of missed and incorrect diagnoses, improves diagnostic consistency and efficiency, and holds value for clinical auxiliary applications.
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.