ArticlePediatric radiology2018
Maturation of pelvic ossification centers on computed tomography in normal children.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pediatric chronological age estimation from pelvic radiographs using deep learning: a multicenter retrospective study.European radiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Salter and Pemberton osteotomies in developmental dysplasia of the hip: the role of the congruity index as a prognostic factor.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Multiple Ossification Centers of the Pubic Bone as a Supportive Radiographic Feature forDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Age-specific normative values of sacral development and fusion in children and adolescents: a cross-sectional study utilizing multiplanar reconstruction computed tomography imaging.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Inguinal-Related Groin Pain and/or Disruption in Athletes: Current Understanding, Assessment and Management Strategies.Open access journal of sports medicine · 2025Review
- Deep learning-based fully automatic Risser stage assessment model using abdominal radiographs.Pediatric radiology · 2024Article
- [Radiological diagnosis of apophyseal injuries of the pelvic region].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Growth pattern of lumbar maturity stage at L1 to L5 during adolescent growth spurt.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Article
- Article
- The pediatric accessory sacroiliac joint: does it exist?Skeletal radiology · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe pelvis is composed of three paired primary ossification centers: the pubis, the ischium and the ilium. During maturation, multiple secondary ossification centers can be seen in the synchondroses between these bones and in the pelvic apophyses. The fragmented appearance of these centers can be confused with pathology.
objectiveTo examine development of pelvic ossification centers by CT and determine normal appearance throughout childhood. MATERIALS AND
methodsThree pediatric radiologists reviewed 325 pelvic CT scans in children and young adults 5-18 years old and graded 6 pelvic ossification centers to evaluate maturational changes in critical structures.
resultsRate and progression of ossification and age at complete fusion vary with gender at the different ossification centers in the growing pelvis.
conclusionKnowledge of the normal CT appearance of ossification centers throughout childhood is important to differentiate the normal appearance from pathology.
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.