Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of radiomics for predicting osteoporosis and the quality of radiomic studies. The study protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023425058). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 1, 2023, for eligible articles that applied radiomic techniques to diagnosing osteoporosis or abnormal bone mass. Quality and risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated with radiomics quality score (RQS), METhodological RadiomICs Score (METRICS), and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tools. The data analysis utilized the R program with mada, metafor, and meta packages. Ten retrospective studies with 5926 participants were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall risk of bias and applicability concerns for each domain of the studies were rated as low, except for one study which was considered to have a high risk of flow and time bias. The mean METRICS score was 70.1% (range 49.6-83.2%). There was moderate heterogeneity across studies and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity in the data, including imaging modality, feature selection method, and classifier. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) under the bivariate random effects model across the studies was 57.22 (95% CI 27.62-118.52). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 87% (95% CI 81-92%) and 87% (95% CI 77-93%), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the radiomic models was 0.94 (range 0.8 to 0.98). The results supported that the radiomic techniques had good accuracy in diagnosing osteoporosis or abnormal bone mass. The application of radiomics in osteoporosis diagnosis needs to be further confirmed by more prospective studies with rigorous adherence to existing guidelines and multicenter validation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00198-024-07136-y | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!