Uran Ferizi1, Stephen Honig2, Gregory Chang1. 1. Department of Radiology. 2. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Artificial intelligence tools have found new applications in medical diagnosis. These tools have the potential to capture underlying trends and patterns, otherwise impossible with previous modeling capabilities. Machine learning and deep learning models have found a role in osteoporosis, both to model the risk of fragility fracture, and to help with the identification and segmentation of images. RECENT FINDINGS: Here we survey the latest research in the artificial intelligence application to the prediction of osteoporosis that has been published between January 2017 and March 2019. Around half of the articles that are covered here predict (by classification or regression) an indicator of osteoporosis, such as bone mass or fragility fractures; the other half of studies use tools for automatic segmentation of the images of patients with or at risk of osteoporosis. The data for these studies include diverse signal sources: acoustics, MRI, CT, and of course, X-rays. SUMMARY: New methods for automatic image segmentation, and prediction of fracture risk show promising clinical value. Though these recent developments have had a successful initial application to osteoporosis research, their development is still under improvement, such as accounting for positive/negative class bias. We urge care when reporting accuracy metrics, and when comparing such metrics between different studies.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Artificial intelligence tools have found new applications in medical diagnosis. These tools have the potential to capture underlying trends and patterns, otherwise impossible with previous modeling capabilities. Machine learning and deep learning models have found a role in osteoporosis, both to model the risk of fragility fracture, and to help with the identification and segmentation of images. RECENT FINDINGS: Here we survey the latest research in the artificial intelligence application to the prediction of osteoporosis that has been published between January 2017 and March 2019. Around half of the articles that are covered here predict (by classification or regression) an indicator of osteoporosis, such as bone mass or fragility fractures; the other half of studies use tools for automatic segmentation of the images of patients with or at risk of osteoporosis. The data for these studies include diverse signal sources: acoustics, MRI, CT, and of course, X-rays. SUMMARY: New methods for automatic image segmentation, and prediction of fracture risk show promising clinical value. Though these recent developments have had a successful initial application to osteoporosis research, their development is still under improvement, such as accounting for positive/negative class bias. We urge care when reporting accuracy metrics, and when comparing such metrics between different studies.
Authors: Gregory Chang; Stephen Honig; Ryan Brown; Cem M Deniz; Kenneth A Egol; James S Babb; Ravinder R Regatte; Chamith S Rajapakse Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-04-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: J Wang; D Yan; A Zhao; X Hou; X Zheng; P Chen; Y Bao; W Jia; C Hu; Z-L Zhang; W Jia Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-02-18 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Yizhou Wang; Aart H G van Assen; Carlos R Reis; Rita Setroikromo; Ronald van Merkerk; Ykelien L Boersma; Robbert H Cool; Wim J Quax Journal: FEBS J Date: 2017-07-07 Impact factor: 5.542
Authors: Hans Peter Dimai; Richard Ljuhar; Davul Ljuhar; Benjamin Norman; Stefan Nehrer; Andreas Kurth; Astrid Fahrleitner-Pammer Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: B C S de Vries; J H Hegeman; W Nijmeijer; J Geerdink; C Seifert; C G M Groothuis-Oudshoorn Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2021-01-07 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Katarzyna Zaorska; Piotr Zawierucha; Monika Świerczewska; Danuta Ostalska-Nowicka; Jacek Zachwieja; Michał Nowicki Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2021-03-30 Impact factor: 5.531
Authors: Ines Foessl; J H Duncan Bassett; Åshild Bjørnerem; Björn Busse; Ângelo Calado; Pascale Chavassieux; Maria Christou; Eleni Douni; Imke A K Fiedler; João Eurico Fonseca; Eva Hassler; Wolfgang Högler; Erika Kague; David Karasik; Patricia Khashayar; Bente L Langdahl; Victoria D Leitch; Philippe Lopes; Georgios Markozannes; Fiona E A McGuigan; Carolina Medina-Gomez; Evangelia Ntzani; Ling Oei; Claes Ohlsson; Pawel Szulc; Jonathan H Tobias; Katerina Trajanoska; Şansın Tuzun; Amina Valjevac; Bert van Rietbergen; Graham R Williams; Tatjana Zekic; Fernando Rivadeneira; Barbara Obermayer-Pietsch Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: Yasmeen Adar Almog; Angshu Rai; Patrick Zhang; Amanda Moulaison; Ross Powell; Anirban Mishra; Kerry Weinberg; Celeste Hamilton; Mary Oates; Eugene McCloskey; Steven R Cummings Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 5.428