ArticleJournal of bone and mineral metabolism2021
Comparison of novel DXA system, Shimazu SONIALVISION G4, with GE-Lunar PRODIGY.
Article in Journal of bone and mineral metabolism, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validity of Bone Mineral Density Measurements Using SONIALVISION G4: A Quantitative CT-based Evaluation.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2026Article
- A cross-calibration study using a novel dual X-ray absorptiometry system for bone mineral density measurements with the European Spine Phantom.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSONIALVISION G4 (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) is a fluoroscopic imaging system capable of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) using the additional application. However, bone mineral density (BMD) with this system is calibrated only by a phantom, and the necessity to confirm the reliability of BMD measurement in human subjects has been pointed out. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical reliability of BMD measurement using SONIALVISION G4 by comparing it with PRODIGY (GE Healthcare, Madison, WI, USA), a reference system in developing the DXA application. MATERIALS AND
methodsBMD measurements using these two DXA systems were performed on the same day at the lumbar spine and bilateral proximal femur of 130 subjects aged 22-86 years. The agreement and correlation between the measurements were determined. Thirty out of the 130 subjects were scanned twice to determine the precision of the SONIALVISION G4 system.
resultsBMD was highly correlated between the two DXA systems both at the lumbar spine and proximal femur, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.963 (left total hip) to 0.989 (left femoral neck). Differences in BMD measured by the two systems were less than 3.0%, but a small proportional bias was observed in the Bland-Altman analysis. Coefficients of variation in BMD measurement were 1.77% in the lumbar spine and 1.41-2.76% in the proximal femur.
conclusionsAlthough BMD values by SONIALVISION G4 were close to those by PRODIGY, follow-up studies should be performed using the same device because of the small difference between devices.
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.