Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42432629›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026

Evaluation of AI developed for rib fracture detection in identifying vertebral fractures on abdominal CT.

Hyunjung Kim, Yongfeng Gao, Jin Woo Kim, Jhii-Hyun Ahn, Ga-Young Yoon, Yeon-Jun Kim, Sung Min Ko

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Hyunjung KimDepartment of Radiology, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, 20 Ilsan-Ro, Wonju, 26426, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6522-9883
Yongfeng GaoCollaborative Innovation Department, United Imaging Healthcare North America, Houston, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6169-3478
Jin Woo KimDepartment of Radiology, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, 20 Ilsan-Ro, Wonju, 26426, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3155-0569
Jhii-Hyun AhnDepartment of Radiology, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, 20 Ilsan-Ro, Wonju, 26426, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3784-9350
Ga-Young YoonDepartment of Radiology, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, 20 Ilsan-Ro, Wonju, 26426, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-8990-0685
Yeon-Jun KimDepartment of Human Health Convergence, Graduate School, Kangwon National University, 346 Jungang-Ro, Samcheok, 25913, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-5558-0245
Sung Min KoDepartment of Radiology, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, 20 Ilsan-Ro, Wonju, 26426, Korea. airgarnett3@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7420-6269

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the performance of an AI algorithm originally developed for rib fracture detection in identifying vertebral fractures on abdominal CT scans.

methodsA retrospective study was performed on 58 patients with both CT and MRI scans. An AI model and ER clinicians independently assessed CT images for fractures of the vertebral body, transverse processes, and spinous processes. Two spine radiologists reviewed both CT and MRI data and established the reference standard.

resultsAt the patient level, both the AI algorithm and ER clinicians achieved 100% sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and F1-score. At the vertebral level, the AI algorithm achieved higher sensitivity than ER clinicians (67% vs. 54%, p < 0.05), with similar accuracy (93% vs. 94%, p = 0.73). At the anatomical location level, the AI algorithm achieved a sensitivity of 62%, accuracy of 98%, and an F1-score of 0.69, compared with 46% sensitivity (p < 0.05), 97% accuracy (p = 0.92), and an F1-score of 0.62 (p = 0.50) for ER clinicians. Among 178 confirmed fracture locations, the AI algorithm detected 110 cases, whereas ER clinicians identified 81. Of the 97 fractures missed by ER clinicians, the AI algorithm correctly detected 51.

conclusionsThe AI software originally trained for rib fracture detection identified vertebral fractures with higher sensitivity compared to those detected by ER clinicians. Its ability to identify otherwise missed fractures highlights its value as a supplementary tool in urgent care.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceRib FracturesSpinal FracturesTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityAIComputed tomographyDeep learningThoracolumbarThoracolumbar vertebraeVertebral fracture

Identifiers

PMID42432629
PMCPMC13644195

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.