Transferability of bone phenotyping and fracture risk assessment by μFRAC from first-generation high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography to second-generation scan data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The continued development of high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) has led to a second-generation scanner with higher resolution and longer scan region. However, large multicenter prospective cohorts were collected with first-generation HR-pQCT and have been used to develop bone phenotyping and fracture risk prediction (μFRAC) models. This study establishes whether there is sufficient universality of these first-generation trained models for use with second-generation scan data. METHODS: HR-pQCT data were collected for a cohort of 60 individuals, who had been scanned on both first- and second-generation scanners on the same day to establish the universality of the HR-pQCT models. These data were each used as input to first-generation trained bone microarchitecture models for bone phenotyping and fracture risk prediction, and their outputs were compared for each study participant. Reproducibility of the models were assessed using same-day repeat scans obtained from first-generation (n = 37) and second-generation (n = 74) scanners. RESULTS: Across scanner generations, the bone phenotyping model performed with an accuracy of 93.1%. Similarly, the 5-year fracture risk assessment by μFRAC was well correlated with a Pearson's (r) correlation coefficient of r > 0.83 for the three variations of μFRAC (varying inclusion of clinical risk factors, finite element analysis, and dual X-ray absorptiometry). The first-generation reproducibility cohort performed with an accuracy for categorical assignment of 100% (bone phenotyping) and a correlation coefficient of 0.99 (μFRAC), whereas the second-generation reproducibility cohort performed with an accuracy of 96.4% (bone phenotyping) and a correlation coefficient of 0.99 (μFRAC). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that bone microarchitecture models trained using first-generation scan data generalize well to second-generation scans, performing with a high level of accuracy and reproducibility. Less than 4% of individuals' estimated fracture risk led to a change in treatment threshold, and in general, these dissimilar outcomes using second-generation data tended to be more conservative.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".