Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of findings

From: Machine learning algorithms for diagnosis of hip bone osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis study

ID

Expert radiologists involved as a control

Mean age, years

Gender, N (%)

AI model

Reference standard

Outcomes

Male

Female

Ou Yang et al. (2021)/Taiwan [33]

Yes

81.4 ± 6.95

3053

2929

ANN, SVM, RF, KNN, LR

DXA

Machine learning algorithms improve the performance of screening for osteoporosis

de Vries et al. (2021)/The Netherlands [26]

Yes

 > 50

2564

5014

ANN, RSF

DXA

Major Osteoporotic Fracture can be done with adequate discriminative performance

Shtar et al. (2021)/Israel [20]

Yes

83.1 ± 7.4

514

1382

AdaBoost, CatBoost, ExtraTrees, KNN, RF, SVM, XGBoost

DXA

hip fracture patients are superior to linear and logistic regression models

Kuo et al., (2020)/China [32]

Yes

66.1 ± 1.7

18

151

Deep-TEN, ResNet-18

DXA

The bone texture model can detect osteoporosis and predict the FRAX score

Engels et al., (2020)/Germany [27]

Yes

75.67 ± 6.20

147,377

140,709

LR, SVM, RF, RUSBoost, Superlearner, XGBoost

DXA

Super learners showed poorer discrimination and calibration in the validation set

Villamor et al., (2020)/Spain [34]

Yes

81.4 ± 6.95

NA

137

SVM, LR, NN, RF

DXA

Prediction of the hip fracture without interrupting the actual clinical workflow

Galassi et al., (2020)/Spain [28]

Yes

81.4 ± 6.95

NA

137

LR, SVM, DT, RF

DXA

Clinical, geometric, and biomechanical variables from the finite element simulation of a side fall are used as independent variables to train the models

amamoto et al. (2020)/Japan [15]

Yes

82.7 ± 8.3

346

877

CNN; ResNet18, ResNet34, GoogleNet, E

cientNet b3, E

cientNet b4

DXA

High accuracy for the CNN models diagnosed osteoporosis from hip radiographs

Erjiang et al., (2020)/China [24]

Yes

60.24 ± 10.56

107

1162

XGB, BFDA, NN, CB, LR, RF, SVM

DXA

MLTs could improve DXA detection of osteoporosis classification in older men and women

Kong et al., (2020)/Republic of Korea [31]

Yes

61.2 ± 8.7

970

1257

CB, SVM, LR

DXA

CatBoost model, the top predicting factors

Hussain et al., (2019)/Republic of Korea [30]

Yes

NA

150

RF

DXA

RF will reduce workload and improve the use of X-ray devices

Ho-Le et al., (2017) [29]/Australia

Yes

69.1 ± 6.4

NA

1167

ANN, LR, KNN, SVM

DXA

ANNs can predict hip fractures

Kruse et al., (2017) [19]/Denmark

Yes

74.5 ± 65.5, 69.3 ± 59.9

717

4722

bagFDA, xgbTree

DXA

Machine learning can improve hip fracture prediction beyond logistic regression

  1. DXA Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, Deep-TEN Deep Texture Encoding Network, ResNet-18 three blocks of Residual Network with 18 layers, SVM Support Vector Machine with RBF radial basis function, LR Logistic Regression, SNN Shallow Neural Networks, RF Random Forest, convolutional neural network (CNN), Decision Trees (DT), eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB), BFDA Bagged Flexible Discriminant Analysis, CB CatBoost, ANN artificial neural network, bagFDA bootstrap aggregated flexible discriminant analysis model, xgbTree eXtreme Gradient Boosting, RSF Random Survival Forests, GB Gradient boosting, KNN k-nearest neighbors algorithm