• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

两种不同人工智能(AI)方法评估腕骨骨龄与标准 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法的比较。

Performance of two different artificial intelligence (AI) methods for assessing carpal bone age compared to the standard Greulich and Pyle method.

机构信息

Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini Policlinico, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Via del Vespro 127, 90127, Palermo, Italy.

UOC Radiologia Pediatrica Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini e Interventistica, ARNAS, Ospedali Civico, Di Cristina Benfratelli, Palermo, Italy.

出版信息

Radiol Med. 2024 Oct;129(10):1507-1512. doi: 10.1007/s11547-024-01871-2. Epub 2024 Aug 20.

DOI:10.1007/s11547-024-01871-2
PMID:39162939
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11480116/
Abstract

PURPOSE

Evaluate the agreement between bone age assessments conducted by two distinct machine learning system and standard Greulich and Pyle method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Carpal radiographs of 225 patients (mean age 8 years and 10 months, SD = 3 years and 1 month) were retrospectively analysed at two separate institutions (October 2018 and May 2022) by both expert radiologists and radiologists in training as well as by two distinct AI software programmes, 16-bit AI and BoneXpert® in a blinded manner.

RESULTS

The bone age range estimated by the 16-bit AI system in our sample varied between 1 year and 1 month and 15 years and 8 months (mean bone age 9 years and 5 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). BoneXpert® estimated bone age ranged between 8 months and 15 years and 7 months (mean bone age 8 years and 11 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). The average bone age estimated by the Greulich and Pyle method was between 11 months and 14 years, 9 months (mean bone age 8 years and 4 months SD = 3 years and 3 months). Radiologists' assessments using the Greulich and Pyle method were significantly correlated (Pearson's r > 0.80, p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference between BoneXpert® and 16-bit AI (mean difference = - 0.19, 95%CI = (- 0.45; 0.08)), and the agreement between two measurements varies between - 3.45 (95%CI = (- 3.95; - 3.03) and 3.07 (95%CI - 3.03; 3.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Both AI methods and GP provide correlated results, although the measurements made by AI were closer to each other compared to the GP method.

摘要

目的

评估两种不同机器学习系统与标准 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法的骨龄评估之间的一致性。

材料与方法

回顾性分析了 225 例患者(平均年龄 8 岁 10 个月,标准差 3 岁 1 个月)的腕骨 X 线片,这些患者分别于 2018 年 10 月和 2022 年 5 月在两个不同的机构(October 2018 and May 2022)由专家放射科医生和放射科医生培训生以及两种不同的人工智能软件程序 16 位 AI 和 BoneXpert® 进行盲法分析。

结果

在我们的样本中,16 位 AI 系统估计的骨龄范围为 1 年 1 个月至 15 年 8 个月(平均骨龄 9 岁 5 个月,标准差 3 岁 3 个月)。BoneXpert® 估计的骨龄范围为 8 个月至 15 年 7 个月(平均骨龄 8 岁 11 个月,标准差 3 岁 3 个月)。Greulich 和 Pyle 方法估计的平均骨龄在 11 个月至 14 岁之间,为 9 个月(平均骨龄 8 岁 4 个月,标准差 3 岁 3 个月)。放射科医生使用 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法评估的骨龄明显相关(Pearson's r>0.80,p<0.001)。BoneXpert® 和 16 位 AI 之间没有统计学差异(平均差异=-0.19,95%CI=-0.45;0.08),两次测量之间的一致性在-3.45(95%CI=-3.95;-3.03)至 3.07(95%CI=-3.03;3.57)之间。

结论

两种人工智能方法和 GP 提供了相关的结果,尽管人工智能方法的测量值彼此之间更接近。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b17/11480116/999ae4a2a7db/11547_2024_1871_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b17/11480116/6a5995269313/11547_2024_1871_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b17/11480116/af459efb6388/11547_2024_1871_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b17/11480116/999ae4a2a7db/11547_2024_1871_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b17/11480116/6a5995269313/11547_2024_1871_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b17/11480116/af459efb6388/11547_2024_1871_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b17/11480116/999ae4a2a7db/11547_2024_1871_Fig3_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Performance of two different artificial intelligence (AI) methods for assessing carpal bone age compared to the standard Greulich and Pyle method.两种不同人工智能(AI)方法评估腕骨骨龄与标准 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法的比较。
Radiol Med. 2024 Oct;129(10):1507-1512. doi: 10.1007/s11547-024-01871-2. Epub 2024 Aug 20.
2
Automated bone age assessment in a German pediatric cohort: agreement between an artificial intelligence software and the manual Greulich and Pyle method.德国儿科队列中的自动骨龄评估:人工智能软件与手动 Greulich 和 Pyle 方法的一致性。
Eur Radiol. 2024 Jul;34(7):4407-4413. doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-10543-0. Epub 2023 Dec 28.
3
Artificial intelligence in bone age assessment: accuracy and efficiency of a novel fully automated algorithm compared to the Greulich-Pyle method.人工智能在骨龄评估中的应用:新型全自动算法与 Greulich-Pyle 方法的准确性和效率比较。
Eur Radiol Exp. 2020 Jan 28;4(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s41747-019-0139-9.
4
[Correlation in radiological bone age determination using the Greulich and Pyle method versus automated evaluation using BoneXpert software].[使用格鲁利希和派尔方法进行放射学骨龄测定与使用BoneXpert软件进行自动评估之间的相关性]
Rev Chil Pediatr. 2018 Oct;89(5):606-611. doi: 10.4067/S0370-41062018005000705.
5
Clinical Validation of a Deep Learning-Based Hybrid (Greulich-Pyle and Modified Tanner-Whitehouse) Method for Bone Age Assessment.深度学习为基础的混合(格雷夫利希-派尔和改良的坦纳-怀特豪斯)骨龄评估方法的临床验证。
Korean J Radiol. 2021 Dec;22(12):2017-2025. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2020.1468. Epub 2021 Oct 1.
6
Applicability and robustness of an artificial intelligence-based assessment for Greulich and Pyle bone age in a German cohort.基于人工智能的格雷利希和派尔骨龄评估在德国队列中的适用性和稳健性。
Rofo. 2024 Jun;196(6):600-606. doi: 10.1055/a-2203-2997. Epub 2023 Dec 8.
7
Bone age determination in eutrophic, overweight and obese Brazilian children and adolescents: a comparison between computerized BoneXpert and Greulich-Pyle methods.巴西营养良好、超重和肥胖儿童和青少年的骨龄测定:计算机 BoneXpert 法与 Greulich-Pyle 法的比较。
Pediatr Radiol. 2019 Aug;49(9):1185-1191. doi: 10.1007/s00247-019-04435-z. Epub 2019 May 31.
8
High performance for bone age estimation with an artificial intelligence solution.人工智能解决方案在骨龄评估中的高性能表现。
Diagn Interv Imaging. 2023 Jul-Aug;104(7-8):330-336. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2023.04.003. Epub 2023 Apr 22.
9
A critical comparative study of the performance of three AI-assisted programs for bone age determination.三种人工智能辅助骨龄测定程序性能的关键比较研究。
Eur Radiol. 2025 Mar;35(3):1190-1196. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11169-6. Epub 2024 Nov 5.
10
Evaluation of a Computer-Aided Diagnosis System for Automated Bone Age Assessment in Comparison to the Greulich-Pyle Atlas Method: A Multireader Study.与格-派图谱法相比的计算机辅助诊断系统用于自动骨龄评估的评价:一项多读者研究
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2019 Jan/Feb;43(1):39-45. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000786.

引用本文的文献

1
Predicting pediatric age from chest X-rays using deep learning: a novel approach.利用深度学习从胸部X光预测儿童年龄:一种新方法。
Insights Imaging. 2025 Aug 23;16(1):184. doi: 10.1186/s13244-025-02068-5.
2
Recent topics in musculoskeletal imaging focused on clinical applications of AI: How should radiologists approach and use AI?肌肉骨骼成像的最新主题聚焦于人工智能的临床应用:放射科医生应如何看待和使用人工智能?
Radiol Med. 2025 Feb 24. doi: 10.1007/s11547-024-01947-z.

本文引用的文献

1
Autonomous artificial intelligence in pediatric radiology: the use and perception of BoneXpert for bone age assessment.儿科放射学中的自主人工智能:BoneXpert 用于骨龄评估的使用和感知。
Pediatr Radiol. 2022 Jun;52(7):1338-1346. doi: 10.1007/s00247-022-05295-w. Epub 2022 Feb 28.
2
Can AI distinguish a bone radiograph from photos of flowers or cars? Evaluation of bone age deep learning model on inappropriate data inputs.人工智能能否区分骨 X 光片与花卉或汽车的照片?对不适当数据输入的骨龄深度学习模型的评估。
Skeletal Radiol. 2022 Feb;51(2):401-406. doi: 10.1007/s00256-021-03880-y. Epub 2021 Aug 5.
3
Modernization of bone age assessment: comparing the accuracy and reliability of an artificial intelligence algorithm and shorthand bone age to Greulich and Pyle.
骨龄评估的现代化:比较人工智能算法和简易骨龄与 Greulich 和 Pyle 的准确性和可靠性。
Skeletal Radiol. 2020 Sep;49(9):1449-1457. doi: 10.1007/s00256-020-03429-5. Epub 2020 Apr 23.
4
Artificial intelligence in bone age assessment: accuracy and efficiency of a novel fully automated algorithm compared to the Greulich-Pyle method.人工智能在骨龄评估中的应用:新型全自动算法与 Greulich-Pyle 方法的准确性和效率比较。
Eur Radiol Exp. 2020 Jan 28;4(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s41747-019-0139-9.
5
Bone age for chronological age determination - statement of the European Society of Paediatric Radiology musculoskeletal task force group.骨龄用于确定实际年龄 - 欧洲儿科放射学会肌肉骨骼工作组的声明。
Pediatr Radiol. 2019 Jun;49(7):979-982. doi: 10.1007/s00247-019-04379-4. Epub 2019 Mar 26.
6
The RSNA Pediatric Bone Age Machine Learning Challenge.RSNA 儿科骨龄机器学习挑战赛。
Radiology. 2019 Feb;290(2):498-503. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018180736. Epub 2018 Nov 27.
7
A systematic review of the agreement between chronological age and skeletal age based on the Greulich and Pyle atlas.基于 Greulich 和 Pyle 图谱的基于年龄与骨骼年龄的一致性的系统评价
Eur Radiol. 2019 Jun;29(6):2936-2948. doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5718-2. Epub 2018 Oct 30.
8
Computerized Bone Age Estimation Using Deep Learning Based Program: Evaluation of the Accuracy and Efficiency.基于深度学习的计算机骨龄估算:准确性和效率评估。
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Dec;209(6):1374-1380. doi: 10.2214/AJR.17.18224. Epub 2017 Sep 12.
9
Skeletal development of the hand and wrist: digital bone age companion-a suitable alternative to the Greulich and Pyle atlas for bone age assessment?手部和腕部的骨骼发育:数字骨龄伴侣——骨龄评估中替代格-派图谱的合适选择?
Skeletal Radiol. 2017 Jun;46(6):785-793. doi: 10.1007/s00256-017-2616-7. Epub 2017 Mar 25.
10
Forensic use of the Greulich and Pyle atlas: prediction intervals and relevance.格吕利希和派尔图谱在法医学中的应用:预测区间及相关性
Eur Radiol. 2017 Mar;27(3):1032-1043. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4466-4. Epub 2016 Jun 29.