ArticleScientific reports2021
Three-dimensional evaluation of the coccyx movement between supine and standing positions using conventional and upright computed tomography imaging.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Morphometric Variants of the Coccyx in an Eastern Indian Cohort: Analysis from a Tertiary Care Center.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Application of upright multidetector CT in orthopedics and the musculoskeletal system: insights into anatomy, alignment, and biomechanics.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Review
- MRI-Based Morphometric Analysis of the Sacral Hiatus and Its Exploratory Value for Predicting Caudal Epidural Block Success: A Retrospective Observational Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Susceptibility of Coccydynia in Morphology: A Cross-Sectional Study.Pain research & management · 2025Article
- Management of coccygodynia: talking points from a systematic review of recent clinical trials.Annals of joint · 2025Review
- The overlooked symptom of coccydynia: evaluation of sacrococcygeal morphologic and morphometric findings.Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Anatomical cardiac and electrocardiographic axes correlate in both upright and supine positions: an upright/supine CT study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
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
Currently, no three-dimensional reference data exist for the normal coccyx in the standing position on computed tomography (CT); however, this information could have utility for evaluating patients with coccydynia and pelvic floor dysfunction. Thus, we aimed to compare coccygeal parameters in the standing versus supine positions using upright and supine CT and evaluate the effects of sex, age, and body mass index (BMI) on coccygeal movement. Thirty-two healthy volunteers underwent both upright (standing position) and conventional (supine position) CT examinations. In the standing position, the coccyx became significantly longer and straighter, with the tip of the coccyx moving backward and downward (all p < 0.001). Additionally, the coccygeal straight length (standing/supine, 37.8 ± 7.1/35.7 ± 7.0 mm) and sacrococcygeal straight length (standing/supine, 131.7 ± 11.2/125.0 ± 10.7 mm) were significantly longer in the standing position. The sacrococcygeal angle (standing/supine, 115.0 ± 10.6/105.0 ± 12.5°) was significantly larger, while the lumbosacral angle (standing/supine, 21.1 ± 5.9/25.0 ± 4.9°) was significantly smaller. The migration length of the tip of the coccyx (mean, 7.9 mm) exhibited a moderate correlation with BMI (r = 0.42, p = 0.0163). Our results may provide important clues regarding the pathogenesis of coccydynia and pelvic floor dysfunction.
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.