CClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07421791Updated Feb 27, 2026

Clinical Validation of RBfracture for Diagnosing Trauma-related Musculoskeletal Injuries

An observational study in Fracture, Joint Dislocation and Joint Effusion, sponsored by Radiobotics. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 22 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-02-27.

Sponsored by Radiobotics · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
415
Ages
22 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this study is to determine if the computer software, RBfracture, developed by Radiobotics, helps primary care, emergency, and radiology clinicians more easily identify bone injuries caused by a traumatic impact (such as a fall or car collision). RBfracture uses artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze X-ray images of patients to identify fractures and joint dislocations visible on the X-ray images. RBfracture also identifies fluid buildup in the elbow and knee joints resulting from a fracture or dislocation.

Sixteen clinicians will review X-ray images from 415 adult patients, who may have sustained a bone injury, to diagnose any injuries visible on their X-ray images. First, the clinicians will review half of the images with and half of the images without the help of the RBfracture software. After a 4-week break, the clinicians will once again review the same images. This time, the software's help will be switched, so it is unavailable for the images the clinicians previously reviewed with it, and available for the images they reviewed without it.

The number of correct and incorrect diagnoses made by the clinicians when they were helped by the software will be compared to the number of correct and incorrect diagnoses made by the clinicians when they did not receive any help from the software. This comparison will reveal if using the software helps clinicians to diagnose more injuries and miss less injuries.

Read the detailed description

RBfracture, developed by Radiobotics (Copenhagen, Denmark), is a decision-support software solution for computerized detection and diagnosis of acute fractures, joint dislocations, joint effusion, and lipohemarthrosis. To demonstrate improved diagnostic performance of the intended users when assisted by RBfracture, a fully-crossed multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) study will be conducted. 415 study exams will be retrospectively obtained through stratified sampling with enrichment to represent all anatomical regions supported by the software. Sixteen independent clinicians representing various clinical roles and years of experience will participate as study readers.

The reference standard will be established by American Board of Radiology (ABR)-certified radiologists with a minimum of 3 years of experience post certification. All exams will be reviewed and annotated by two musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists, independently. Annotations will be done in a medical-grade reading environment, using diagnostic quality monitors. If required, any disagreement will be adjudicated by a third specialized radiologist.

In both assisted and unassisted sessions, readers will localize every unique fracture, joint dislocation, joint effusion, and lipohemarthrosis. For each finding, readers will provide a bounding box and a confidence score (1-5). Additionally, at the exam level, readers will indicate the presence or absence of each injury type along with a confidence score (0-100).

At the case level, ROC curves will be generated for each reader under both device-assisted and unassisted reading scenarios. The AUC of the ROC curve per reader in each reading scenario, and the difference in the reader-averaged AUC between device-assisted and unassisted reading scenarios will be calculated. The difference in reader-averaged AUC between the two reading scenarios will be reported as the primary outcome to demonstrate improved diagnostic performance of the intended users. Exam-level sensitivity, specificity, and average false positives, and injury-level sensitivity and AUC-AFROC will be presented as secondary outcomes.

02

Conditions studied

  • Fracture
  • Joint Dislocation
  • Joint Effusion
  • Knee Lipohemarthrosis
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
22 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

X-ray exams of adult patients suspected of having trauma-related musculoskeletal injuries.

Inclusion criteria

  • XR exams of a patient ≥22 years of age following a recent acute musculoskeletal trauma.
  • Modality is digitally acquired radiographs (Computed Radiography or Digital Radiography)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • XR exam types that are outside of the intended use (e.g., chest, abdomen, facial bones, cervical spine).
  • Exams with missing patient age.
  • Exams from follow-up patient examinations, e.g., post-surgical controls or evaluation of fracture healing.
  • Any exams containing radiographs previously used in software development.
  • Exams containing additional radiographs that are incoherent with the XR exam type (e.g., wrist radiograph in a hip and pelvis exam type).
  • Radiograph views that are unsupported.
  • Poor radiographic image quality, rendering radiograph clinically unsuitable (e.g., inappropriate selection of technical exposure factors, patient motion, presence of artefacts, and improper collimation of the radiographic beam).
04

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
415 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No
Biospecimen retention
Samples without dna

Groups and cohorts

  • device-assisted

    In the device-assisted modality, study readers will interpret patient X-ray exams with RBfracture assistance.

    Diagnostic Test: RBfracture

  • device-unassisted

    In the device-unassisted modality, study readers will interpret patient X-ray exams without RBfracture assistance.

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testRBfracture

    RBfracture is a decision support software designed to assist the intended user in diagnosing fracture, joint dislocation, joint effusion, and lipohemarthrosis.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in diagnostic accuracy between device-assisted and device-unassisted readers at the exam level.

    The difference in the reader-averaged AUC between device-assisted and device-unassisted readers is significant at a one-sided p value of 0.025.

    Time frame: one month

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in diagnostic accuracy between device-assisted and device-unassisted readers at the exam level.

    The difference in reader-averaged sensitivity and specificity between device-assisted and device-unassisted readers.

    Time frame: one month

  2. Change in diagnostic accuracy between device-assisted and device-unassisted readers at the injury level.

    The difference in reader-averaged AUC-AFROC, sensitivity, and false positives per exam between device-assisted and device-unassisted readers.

    Time frame: one month

  3. Generalizability of device performance across demographic and technical factors

    At the exam level, the difference in AUC, sensitivity, and specificity between device-assisted and device-unassisted readers, with data stratified by reader qualification, patient sex, patient ethnicity (if available), and radiographic machine manufacturer.

    Time frame: one month

06

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

07

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07421791
Lead sponsor
Radiobotics
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Feb 19, 2026
Start date
Feb 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Apr 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Apr 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Feb 27, 2026

Study contacts

Janitha M Mudannayake, PhD
Contact
jm@radiobotics.com
+46708412511

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Feb 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion