ArticleKorean journal of radiology2021
Digital Tomosynthesis versus Conventional Radiography for Evaluating Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head.
Article in Korean journal of radiology, 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.
- Clinical Utility of AI-Enabled CT-to-MRI Translation for Degenerative Spinal Disorders: A Retrospective Reader Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic yield of dental radiography and digital tomosynthesis for the identification of anatomic structures in dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performances of digital tomosynthesis (DTS) and conventional radiography in detecting osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) using computed tomography (CT), as the reference standard and evaluate the diagnostic reproducibility of DTS. MATERIALS AND
methodsForty-five patients (24 male and 21 female; age range, 25-77 years) with clinically suspected ONFH underwent anteroposterior radiography, DTS, and CT. Two musculoskeletal radiologists independently evaluated the presence and type of ONFH. The diagnostic performance of radiography and DTS in detecting the presence of ONFH and determining the types of ONFH were evaluated. The interobserver and intraobserver reliabilities of each imaging modality were analyzed using Cohen's kappa.
resultsDTS had higher sensitivity (89.4%-100% vs. 74.5%-76.6%) and specificity (97.3%-100% vs. 78.4%-83.8%) for ONFH detection than radiography. DTS showed higher performance than radiography in identifying the subtypes of ONFH with statistical significance in one reader (type 1, 100% vs. 30.8%,
conclusionDTS showed higher diagnostic performance and reproducibility than radiography in detecting ONFH. DTS may be used as a first-line diagnostic modality instead of radiography for patients suspected of having ONFH.
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.