ReviewQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026
Progress in machine learning-assisted medical imaging for osteoarthritis and osteoporosis diagnosis: a narrative review.
Review in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 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
Background and Objective: Osteoarthritis (OA) and osteoporosis (OP) are prevalent musculoskeletal disorders with substantial global health and economic burdens. Imaging is central to their diagnosis and monitoring, yet manual interpretation is vulnerable to inter-reader variability and workload-related fatigue. Artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), provides data-driven approaches to enhance the accuracy, efficiency, and objectivity of image interpretation. This review summarizes AI-assisted imaging advances for OA and OP over the past decade and discusses translational opportunities and challenges. Methods: A literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus for English-language studies published between January 2015 and August 2025. Search terms included osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, X-ray, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), machine learning, deep learning, detection, classification, and diagnosis. Titles and abstracts were screened, and selected full texts were reviewed to summarize advances and diagnostic performance across modalities. Key Content and Findings: Across X-ray, CT, and MRI, ML/DL approaches enable more objective quantification of OA- and OP-related abnormalities. Using public and cohort-based datasets, studies have evolved from radiomics-based ML pipelines to end-to-end DL frameworks for screening, classification, and grading. For OA, radiographs dominate Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grading and large-scale screening, complemented by MRI for early tissue biomarkers and CT for quantifying subchondral bone remodeling. For OP, X-ray/CT captures bone texture and trabecular microarchitecture to support detection and classification, with MRI mainly used to assess marrow- and soft-tissue-related markers. Overall, DL typically improves automation and representation learning, while ML remains interpretable and competitive in smaller datasets. Emerging studies suggest that multimodal fusion and longitudinal modeling for progression assessment and prediction may further improve performance. Conclusions: AI-assisted imaging is reshaping OA and OP assessment by enabling earlier detection and more objective longitudinal monitoring. However, clinical translation is hindered by limited interpretability of many DL models and substantial data heterogeneity. Future research should prioritize standardized multicenter datasets and explainable AI frameworks. Prospective clinical studies and rigorous external validation are needed to bridge the gap between research and practice and to advance personalized musculoskeletal care.
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.