ArticleThe British journal of radiology2012
Bone age assessment by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in children: an alternative for X-ray?
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tell me your triradiate is closed without telling me it's closed: assessment of surrogate radiographic markers for prediction of triradiate closure.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Mandibular Cortical Thickness Predicts Skull BMD in Adolescents.Calcified tissue international · 2026Article
- CYP11B1 variants influence skeletal maturation via alternative splicing.Communications biology · 2021Article
- A Novel Shorthand Approach to Knee Bone Age Using MRI: A Validation and Reliability Study.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of the study was to validate dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as a method to assess bone age in children.
methodsPaired dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans and X-rays of the left hand were performed in 95 children who attended the paediatric endocrinology outpatient clinic of University Hospital Rotterdam, the Netherlands. We compared bone age assessments by DXA scan with those performed by X-ray. Bone age assessment was performed by two blinded observers according to the reference method of Greulich and Pyle. Intra-observer and interobserver reproducibility were investigated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and agreement was tested using Bland and Altman plots.
resultsThe intra-observer ICCs for both observers were 0.997 and 0.991 for X-ray and 0.993 and 0.987 for DXA assessments. The interobserver ICC was 0.993 and 0.991 for X-ray and DXA assessments, respectively. The mean difference between bone age assessed by X-ray and DXA was 0.11 years. The limits of agreement ranged from -0.82 to 1.05 years, which means that 95% of all differences between the methods were covered by this range.
conclusionsResults of bone age assessment by DXA scan are similar to those obtained by X-ray. The DXA method seems to be an alternative for assessing bone age in a paediatric hospital-based population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.