{"entity": "journal", "iuid": "3ccbee8e09674f599585f70468e5c23c", "timestamp": "2026-07-19T19:03:31.315Z", "links": {"self": {"href": "https://publications.scilifelab.se/journal/Acta%20Orthop.json"}, "display": {"href": "https://publications.scilifelab.se/journal/Acta%20Orthop"}}, "title": "Acta Orthop", "issn": "1745-3682", "issn-l": null, "publications_count": 3, "publications": [{"entity": "publication", "iuid": "688998759da24819bb8ca791b299f124", "links": {"self": {"href": "https://publications.scilifelab.se/publication/688998759da24819bb8ca791b299f124.json"}, "display": {"href": "https://publications.scilifelab.se/publication/688998759da24819bb8ca791b299f124"}}, "title": "Similar risk of cancer in patients younger than 55 years with or without a total hip arthroplasty (THA): a population- based cohort study on 18,771 exposed to THA and 87,683 controls.", "authors": [{"family": "Hailer", "given": "Yasmin D", "initials": "YD"}, {"family": "K\u00e4rrholm", "given": "Johan", "initials": "J"}, {"family": "Eriksson", "given": "Niclas", "initials": "N"}, {"family": "Holmberg", "given": "Lars", "initials": "L"}, {"family": "Hailer", "given": "Nils P", "initials": "NP"}], "type": "journal article", "published": "2022-02-08", "journal": {"title": "Acta Orthop", "issn": "1745-3682", "volume": "93", "pages": "317-326", "issn-l": null}, "abstract": "Concerns related to a potentially increased risk of cancer after total hip arthroplasty (THA) have frequently surfaced, especially since the novel EU medical device regulation classified cobalt as carcinogenic. We assessed the risk of cancer after THA in a nationwide cohort of patients younger than 55 years at surgery.\n\nIn this population-based longitudinal cohort study, 18,771 individuals exposed to THA were identified in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Registry (SHAR) and compared with 87,683 unexposed individuals who were matched by age, sex, and residence. Diagnoses, socioeconomic background, and dates of death were obtained from the Swedish Cancer Register, the National Patient Register, and Statistics Sweden. Primary outcome was the adjusted risk of any cancer after the first THA; secondary outcomes were specific cancer forms.\n\nWe found no enhanced adjusted risk of developing any cancer, either in exposed females compared with unexposed females (hazard ratio [HR] 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-1.2), or in exposed males (HR 1.1, CI 0.99-1.2). When analysing specific cancers, increased adjusted risks were found for thyroid and pancreas cancer in exposed females, and for cancer of the stomach, skin melanoma, and prostate cancer in exposed males.\n\nThis study indicates that there is no statistically significant increased overall risk of cancer in young THA-exposed patients. The potentially slightly enhanced risk for specific cancers may be due to residual confounding resulting from risk factors not accounted for and merits further investigation.", "doi": "10.2340/17453674.2022.2044", "pmid": "35138409", "labels": {"Bioinformatics Support and Infrastructure": "Service", "Bioinformatics Support, Infrastructure and Training": "Service", "Bioinformatics (NBIS)": "Service"}, "xrefs": [{"db": "pmc", "key": "PMC8826686"}], "notes": [], "created": "2023-11-16T12:15:22.844Z", "modified": "2023-11-16T12:15:22.847Z"}, {"entity": "publication", "iuid": "55802e751fa0403883e3200a1adabd46", "links": {"self": {"href": "https://publications.scilifelab.se/publication/55802e751fa0403883e3200a1adabd46.json"}, "display": {"href": "https://publications.scilifelab.se/publication/55802e751fa0403883e3200a1adabd46"}}, "title": "Presenting artificial intelligence, deep learning, and machine learning studies to clinicians and healthcare stakeholders: an introductory reference with a guideline and a Clinical AI Research (CAIR) checklist proposal.", "authors": [{"family": "Olczak", "given": "Jakub", "initials": "J"}, {"family": "Pavlopoulos", "given": "John", "initials": "J"}, {"family": "Prijs", "given": "Jasper", "initials": "J"}, {"family": "Ijpma", "given": "Frank F A", "initials": "FFA"}, {"family": "Doornberg", "given": "Job N", "initials": "JN"}, {"family": "Lundstr\u00f6m", "given": "Claes", "initials": "C"}, {"family": "Hedlund", "given": "Joel", "initials": "J"}, {"family": "Gordon", "given": "Max", "initials": "M"}], "type": "journal article", "published": "2021-10-00", "journal": {"title": "Acta Orthop", "issn": "1745-3682", "issn-l": null, "volume": "92", "issue": "5", "pages": "513-525"}, "abstract": "Background and purpose - Artificial intelligence (AI), deep learning (DL), and machine learning (ML) have become common research fields in orthopedics and medicine in general. Engineers perform much of the work. While they gear the results towards healthcare professionals, the difference in competencies and goals creates challenges for collaboration and knowledge exchange. We aim to provide clinicians with a context and understanding of AI research by facilitating communication between creators, researchers, clinicians, and readers of medical AI and ML research.Methods and results - We present the common tasks, considerations, and pitfalls (both methodological and ethical) that clinicians will encounter in AI research. We discuss the following topics: labeling, missing data, training, testing, and overfitting. Common performance and outcome measures for various AI and ML tasks are presented, including accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, Dice score, the area under the curve, and ROC curves. We also discuss ethical considerations in terms of privacy, fairness, autonomy, safety, responsibility, and liability regarding data collecting or sharing.Interpretation - We have developed guidelines for reporting medical AI research to clinicians in the run-up to a broader consensus process. The proposed guidelines consist of a Clinical Artificial Intelligence Research (CAIR) checklist and specific performance metrics guidelines to present and evaluate research using AI components. Researchers, engineers, clinicians, and other stakeholders can use these proposal guidelines and the CAIR checklist to read, present, and evaluate AI research geared towards a healthcare setting.", "doi": "10.1080/17453674.2021.1918389", "pmid": "33988081", "labels": {"AIDA Data Hub": "Collaborative", "Bioinformatics (NBIS)": "Collaborative"}, "xrefs": [{"db": "pmc", "key": "PMC8519529"}], "notes": [], "created": "2021-11-10T16:57:04.008Z", "modified": "2021-12-09T08:52:20.315Z"}, {"entity": "publication", "iuid": "ed616a14be7b4923afec00da266e0d5c", "links": {"self": {"href": "https://publications.scilifelab.se/publication/ed616a14be7b4923afec00da266e0d5c.json"}, "display": {"href": "https://publications.scilifelab.se/publication/ed616a14be7b4923afec00da266e0d5c"}}, "title": "Uncemented or cemented stems in first-time revision total hip replacement? An observational study of 867 patients including assessment of femoral bone defect size.", "authors": [{"family": "Tyson", "given": "Yosef", "initials": "Y"}, {"family": "Hillman", "given": "Christer", "initials": "C"}, {"family": "Majenburg", "given": "Norbert", "initials": "N"}, {"family": "Sk\u00f6ldenberg", "given": "Olof", "initials": "O"}, {"family": "Rolfson", "given": "Ola", "initials": "O"}, {"family": "K\u00e4rrholm", "given": "Johan", "initials": "J"}, {"family": "Mohaddes", "given": "Maziar", "initials": "M"}, {"family": "Hailer", "given": "Nils P", "initials": "NP"}], "type": "comparative study", "published": "2021-04-00", "journal": {"title": "Acta Orthop", "issn": "1745-3682", "issn-l": null, "volume": "92", "issue": "2", "pages": "143-150"}, "abstract": "Background and purpose - Uncemented stems are gradually replacing cemented stems in hip revision surgery. We compared the risk of re-revision between uncemented and cemented revision stems and assessed whether the different fixation methods are used in similar femoral bone defects.Patients and methods - 867 patients operated on with uncemented or cemented stems in first-time hip revision surgery due to aseptic loosening performed 2006-2016 were identified in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Preoperative femoral bone defect size was assessed on radiographs of all patients. Cox regression models were fitted to estimate the adjusted risk of re-revision during different postoperative time periods. Re-revision of any component for any reason, and stem re-revision, as well as risk of cause-specific re-revision was estimated.Results - Most patients in both fixation groups had Paprosky class IIIA femoral bone defects prior to surgery, but there were more severe bone defects in the cemented group. The adjusted risk of re-revision of any component for any reason was higher in patients with uncemented compared with those with cemented revision stems during the first 3 years after index surgery (hazard ratio [HR] 4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2-9). From the 4th year onward, the risk of re-revision of any component for any reason was similar (HR 0.5, CI 0.2-1.4). Uncemented revision stems conferred a higher risk of dislocation compared with cemented stems (HR 5, CI 1.2-23) during the first 3 years.Interpretation - Although not predominantly used in more complex femoral defects, uncemented revision stem fixation confers a slightly higher risk of re-revision during the first years, but this risk is attenuated after longer follow-up.", "doi": "10.1080/17453674.2020.1846956", "pmid": "33176549", "labels": {"Bioinformatics Support and Infrastructure": "Service", "Bioinformatics Support, Infrastructure and Training": "Service", "Bioinformatics (NBIS)": "Service"}, "xrefs": [{"db": "pmc", "key": "PMC8159203"}], "notes": [], "created": "2020-12-15T14:19:27.710Z", "modified": "2021-11-10T12:45:17.189Z"}], "created": "2020-12-15T14:19:27.726Z", "modified": "2020-12-15T14:19:27.726Z"}