ArticleApplied clinical informatics2021
Developing the Minimum Dataset for the New Mexico Decedent Image Database.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating the Effects of Image Scaling Techniques in Radiographic Measurements of Spinal Alignment and Motion: A Comparative Analysis.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- 3D path planning for robot-assisted vertebroplasty from arbitrary Bi-plane X-ray via differentiable rendering.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2026Article
- The current state of forensic imaging - perspectives.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Review
- Manual and automated facial de-identification techniques for patient imaging with preservation of sinonasal anatomy.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Article
- The Effect of Cancer and Cancer Treatment on Pubic Symphysis Age Estimation Using Computed Tomography Scans.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Application of the Delphi method to the development of common data elements for social drivers of health: A systematic scoping review.Translational behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- From Data to Design: Constructing Scapula and Hip Bone Through Online Datasets, Open-Source Software and 3D Printers.Cureus · 2024Article
- Mapping sexual dimorphism signal in the human cranium.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Efficient cascaded V-net optimization for lower extremity CT segmentation validated using bone morphology assessment.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA minimum dataset (MDS) can be determined ad hoc by an investigator or small team; by a metadata expert; or by using a consensus method to take advantage of the global knowledge and expertise of a large group of experts. The first method is the most commonly applied.
objectiveHere, we describe a use of the third approach using a modified Delphi method to determine the optimal MDS for a dataset of full body computed tomography scans. The scans are of decedents whose deaths were investigated at the New Mexico Office of the Medical Investigator and constitute the New Mexico Decedent Image Database (NMDID).
methodsThe authors initiated the consensus process by suggesting 50 original variables to elicit expert reactions. Experts were recruited from a variety of scientific disciplines and from around the world. Three rounds of variable selection showed high rates of consensus.
resultsIn total, 59 variables were selected, only 52% of which the original resource authors selected. Using a snowball method, a second set of experts was recruited to validate the variables chosen in the design phase. During the validation phase, no variables were selected for deletion.
conclusionNMDID is likely to remain more "future proof" than if a single metadata expert or only the original team of investigators designed the metadata.
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.