MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414081092 · doi:10.2196/79064

YOLOv12 Algorithm-Aided Detection and Classification of Lateral Malleolar Avulsion Fracture and Subfibular Ossicle Based on CT Images: Multicenter Study

2025· article· en· W4414081092 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiayi Liu, Yousheng Yuan, Ke Tian, Liang Xia, Jun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOssicleAvulsion fractureMulticenter studyGold standard (test)AvulsionFracture (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lateral malleolar avulsion fractures (LMAFs) and subfibular ossicles (SFOs) are distinct entities that both present as small bone fragments near the lateral malleolus in imaging but require different treatment strategies. Clinical and radiological differentiation is challenging, which can impede timely and precise management. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the diagnostic gold standard for differentiating LMAFs from SFOs, whereas radiological differentiation using computed tomography (CT) alone is challenging in routine practice. Deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) have shown promise in musculoskeletal imaging diagnostics, but robust, multicenter evidence in this specific context is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate several state-of-the-art DCNNs-including the latest You Only Look Once (YOLO) v12 algorithm-for detecting and classifying LMAFs and SFOs in CT images, using MRI-based diagnoses as the gold standard and to compare model performance with radiologists reading CT alone. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 1918 patients (LMAF: n=1253, 65.3%; SFO: n=665, 34.7%) were enrolled from 2 hospitals in China between 2014 and 2024. MRI served as the gold standard and was independently interpreted by 2 senior musculoskeletal radiologists. Only CT images were used for model training, validation, and testing. CT images were manually annotated with bounding boxes. The cohort was randomly split into a training set (n=1092, 56.93%), internal validation set (n=476, 24.82%), and external test set (n=350, 18.25%). Four deep learning models-faster R-CNN, single shot multibox detector (SSD), RetinaNet, and YOLOv12-were trained and evaluated using identical procedures. Model performance was assessed using mean average precision at intersection over union=0.5 (mAP50), area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. The external test set was also independently interpreted by 2 musculoskeletal radiologists with 7 and 15 years of experience, with results compared with the best-performing model. Saliency maps were generated using Shapley values to enhance interpretability. RESULTS: Among the evaluated models, YOLOv12 achieved the highest detection and classification performance, with a mAP50 of 92.1% and an AUC of 0.983 on the external test set-significantly outperforming faster R-CNN (mAP50 63.7%; AUC 0.79); SSD (mAP50 63%; AUC 0.63); and RetinaNet (mAP50 67.0%; AUC 0.73)-all P<.001. When using CT alone, radiologists performed at a moderate level (accuracy: 75.6% and 69.1%; sensitivity: 75.0% and 65.2%; specificity: 76.0% and 71.1%), whereas YOLOv12 approached MRI-based reference performance (accuracy: 92.0%; sensitivity: 86.7%; specificity: 82.2%). Saliency maps corresponded well with expert-identified regions. CONCLUSIONS: While MRI (read by senior radiologists) is the gold standard for distinguishing LMAFs from SFOs, CT-based differentiation is challenging for radiologists. A CT-only DCNN (YOLOv12) achieved substantially higher performance than radiologists interpreting CT alone and approached the MRI-based reference standard, highlighting its potential to augment CT-based decision-making where MRI is limited or unavailable.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207