ArticleSkeletal radiology2022
Ultra-low-dose cone-beam CT compared to standard dose in the assessment for acute fractures.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultra-low dose post-operative CT protocol after acetabular fixation has excellent intra- and inter-observer reliability.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Performance of CBCT in Detecting Different Types of Root Fractures with Various Intracanal Post Systems.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- Cone beam CT in the imaging of musculoskeletal trauma: a scoping review.Skeletal radiology · 2025Article
- Ultra-Low Dose Computed Tomography Imaging in Quantifying Bone Trauma and Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study.Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Ultra-low-dose CT is feasible for torsion measurement of the lower limb in patients with metal implants.The British journal of radiology · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMulti-detector computed tomography (MDCT) is superior in fracture detection than conventional radiography; however, dose is increased. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) offers higher spatial resolution and lower dose than MDCT. Manufacturers offer an ultra-low-dose algorithm. This study compares the diagnostic accuracy of the ultra-low-dose CBCT (ULDCBCT) with that of the standard-dose CBCT (SDCBCT). MATERIALS AND
methodsIn total, 64 patients were scanned with both the SDCBCT and the ULDCBCT protocols. Both studies were reported by two consultant radiologists with fellowship training in emergency radiology separated in time. The reporter recorded a diagnosis of fracture or normal and diagnostic confidence using a 5-point Likert scale. The gold standard was taken as the SDCBCT. Reporters were blinded to the indication and the SDCBCT report. Cases of discrepancy were resolved by consensus.
resultsThere were 34 fractures and 30 cases had no fracture. Several fractures were missed using the UDCBCT, and there were also several cases of overdiagnosis. ULD was inferior to SD for fracture diagnosis (p < 0.00001). The diagnostic accuracy of ULDCBCT was 82.8% (75.1-88.9 CI). The diagnostic accuracy of plain radiograph was 64% (55.1-75.7% CI). Diagnostic confidence was reduced; the mean confidence for SDCBCT was 4.68 vs 4.12 for ULDCBCT (p < 0.001). The Kappa for interobserver agreement was 0.6.
conclusionULDCBCT is inferior to SDCBCT in fracture detection and confidence is reduced. For diagnostic studies, the standard dose should be used.
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.