Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31784787›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2020

Optimizing HR-pQCT workflow: a comparison of bias and precision error for quantitative bone analysis.

D E Whittier, A N Mudryk, I D Vandergaag, L A Burt, S K Boyd

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. External validation of a novel HR-pQCT based fracture risk assessment tool (μFRAC) in a male cohort: the osteoporotic fractures in men (MrOS) study.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. The association between physical activity during growth and bone microarchitecture at peak bone mass.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Choose your mother wisely: the familial resemblance of bone adaptation.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Bone remodeling and responsiveness to mechanical stimuli in individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Hip Fractures in Older Adults Are Associated With the Low Density Bone Phenotype and Heterogeneous Deterioration of Bone Microarchitecture.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Guidelines for the assessment of bone density and microarchitecture in vivo using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

D E WhittierMcCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health and Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
A N MudrykMcCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health and Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
I D VandergaagMcCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health and Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
L A BurtMcCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health and Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
S K BoydMcCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health and Department of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. skboyd@ucalgary.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2930-5997

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Manual correction of automatically generated contours for high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography can be time consuming and introduces precision error. However, bias related to the automated protocol is unknown. This study provides insight into error bias that is present when using uncorrected contours and inter-operator precision error based on operator training.

introductionHigh-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography workflow includes manually correcting contours generated by the manufacturer's automated protocol. There is interest in minimizing corrections to save time and reduce precision error; however, bias related to the automated protocol is unknown. This study quantifies error bias when contours are uncorrected and identifies the impact of operator training on bias and precision error.

methodsForty-five radii and tibiae scans across a representative range of bone density were analyzed using the automated and manually corrected contours of three operators, with training ranging from beginner to expert, and compared with a "ground truth" to estimate bias. Inter-operator precision was measured across operators.

resultsThe tibia had greater error bias than the radius when contours were uncorrected, with compartmental bone mineral densities and cortical microarchitecture having greatest biases, which could have significant implications for interpretation of studies using this skeletal site. Bias and precision error were greatest when contours were corrected by the beginner operator; however, when this operator was removed, bias was no longer present and inter-operator precision was between 0.01 and 3.74% for all parameters except cortical porosity.

conclusionThese findings establish the need for manual correction and provide guidance on operator training needed to maximize workflow efficiency.

Indexed as

Bone and BonesRadiusBiasBone DensityHumansReproducibility of ResultsTibiaWorkflowBone microarchitectureBone mineral densityEndocortical contourError biasHigh-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomographyPrecision

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.