MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396606387 · doi:10.1093/jbmr/zjae066

Simultaneous automated ascertainment of prevalent vertebral fracture and abdominal aortic calcification in clinical practice: role in fracture risk assessment

2024· article· en· W4396606387 on OpenAlexafffund
John T. Schousboe, Joshua R. Lewis, Barret A. Monchka, Siobhan Reid, Michael Davidson, Douglas Kimelman, Mohammad Jafari Jozani, Cassandra Smith, Marc Sim, Syed Zulqarnain Gilani, David Suter, William D. Leslie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversity of ManitobaGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioOsteoporosisProportional hazards modelInternal medicineFRAXBone densityBone mineralOsteoporotic fractureConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whether simultaneous automated ascertainments of prevalent vertebral fracture (auto-PVFx) and abdominal aortic calcification (auto-AAC) on vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) lateral spine bone density (BMD) images jointly predict incident fractures in routine clinical practice is unclear. We estimated the independent associations of auto-PVFx and auto-AAC primarily with incident major osteoporotic and secondarily with incident hip and any clinical fractures in 11 013 individuals (mean [SD] age 75.8 [6.8] years, 93.3% female) who had a BMD test combined with VFA between March 2010 and December 2017. Auto-PVFx and auto-AAC were ascertained using convolutional neural networks (CNNs). Proportional hazards models were used to estimate the associations of auto-PVFx and auto-AAC with incident fractures over a mean (SD) follow-up of 3.7 (2.2) years, adjusted for each other and other risk factors. At baseline, 17% (n = 1881) had auto-PVFx and 27% (n = 2974) had a high level of auto-AAC (≥ 6 on scale of 0 to 24). Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for incident major osteoporotic fracture (95% CI) were 1.85 (1.59, 2.15) for those with compared with those without auto-PVFx, and 1.36 (1.14, 1.62) for those with high compared with low auto-AAC. The multivariable-adjusted HRs for incident hip fracture were 1.62 (95% CI, 1.26 to 2.07) for those with compared to those without auto-PVFx, and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.15 to 2.09) for those high auto-AAC compared with low auto-AAC. The 5-year cumulative incidence of major osteoporotic fracture was 7.1% in those with no auto-PVFx and low auto-AAC, 10.1% in those with no auto-PVFx and high auto-AAC, 13.4% in those with auto-PVFx and low auto-AAC, and 18.0% in those with auto-PVFx and high auto-AAC. While physician manual review of images in clinical practice will still be needed to confirm image quality and provide clinical context for interpretation, simultaneous automated ascertainment of auto-PVFx and auto-AAC can aid fracture risk assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.451 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207