Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 462

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Automated detection and classification of the proximal humerus fracture by using deep learning algorithm

Open access
Chung, Seok Won, Han, Seung Seog, Lee, Ji Whan, Oh, Kyung-Soo, Kim, Na Ra, Yoon, Jong Pil, Kim, Joon Yub, Moon, Sung Hoon, Kwon, Jieun, Lee, Hyo-Jin, Noh, Young-Min, Kim, Youngjun·2018·Acta Orthopaedica

Abstract

Background and purpose - We aimed to evaluate the ability of artificial intelligence (a deep learning algorithm) to detect and classify proximal humerus fractures using plain anteroposterior shoulder radiographs. Patients and methods - 1,891 images (1 image per person) of normal shoulders (n = 515) and 4 proximal humerus fracture types (greater tuberosity, 346; surgical neck, 514; 3-part, 269; 4-part, 247) classified by 3 specialists were evaluated. We trained a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) after augmentation of a training dataset. The ability of the CNN, as measured by top-1 accuracy, area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC), sensitivity/specificity, and Youden index, in comparison with humans (28 general physicians, 11 general orthopedists, and 19 orthopedists specialized in the shoulder) to detect and classify proximal humerus fractures was evaluated. Results - The CNN showed a high performance of 96% top-1 accuracy, 1.00 AUC, 0.99/0.97 sensitivity/specificity, and 0.97 Youden index for distinguishing normal shoulders from proximal humerus fractures. In addition, the CNN showed promising results with 65-86% top-1 accuracy, 0.90-0.98 AUC, 0.88/0.83-0.97/0.94 sensitivity/specificity, and 0.71-0.90 Youden index for classifying fracture type. When compared with the human groups, the CNN showed superior performance to that of general physicians and orthopedists, similar performance to orthopedists specialized in the shoulder, and the superior performance of the CNN was more marked in complex 3- and 4-part fractures. Interpretation - The use of artificial intelligence can accurately detect and classify proximal humerus fractures on plain shoulder AP radiographs. Further studies are necessary to determine the feasibility of applying artificial intelligence in the clinic and whether its use could improve care and outcomes compared with current orthopedic assessments.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17453674.2018.1453714

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 13 references

Cited by

See all 462

Metadata

Authors
Chung, S. W., Han, S. S., Lee, J. W., Oh, K.-S., Kim, N. R., Yoon, J. P., Kim, J. Y., Moon, S. H., Kwon, J., Lee, H.-J., Noh, Y.-M., & Kim, Y.
Venue
Acta Orthopaedica
Published
2018-03-26
Volume
89
Issue
4
Pages
468-473
ISSN
  • 1745-3674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-3682
OpenAlex
W2793251588
Cited by
462
References
13
FWCI
33.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automated detection and classification of the proximal humerus fracture by using deep learning algorithm. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/17453674.2018.1453714
The paper
Chung, S. W., Han, S. S., Lee, J. W., Oh, K.-S., Kim, N. R., Yoon, J. P., Kim, J. Y., Moon, S. H., Kwon, J., Lee, H.-J., Noh, Y.-M., & Kim, Y. (2018). Automated detection and classification of the proximal humerus fracture by using deep learning algorithm. Acta Orthopaedica. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1453714

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.