ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2021
Accuracy and precision of volumetric bone mineral density assessment using dual-source dual-energy versus quantitative CT: a phantom study.
Article in European radiology experimental, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Dual-Energy CBCT With Reduced Scatter and Cone Beam Artifacts Using an X-Ray Source Array and Interlaced Spectral Filters.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2026Article
- An Anatomically Guided and Optimization-Refined Radiomics Framework for Opportunistic Osteoporosis Assessment from Lumbar Spine MRI.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Knee-specific bone quality assessment for cementless total knee arthroplasty candidate selection: a narrative review.Knee surgery & related research · 2026Review
- Photon-counting detector CT virtual monoenergetic imaging for bone mineral density quantification: Validation with Micro-CT.iScience · 2026Article
- Feasibility of multisource CBCT for improving the predictability of dental implant primary stability compared to conventional CBCT.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Advancing bone health evaluation in Hermann's tortoises (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Utility of clavicle cortex index as a screening tool for low bone mineral density.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Improved muscle and fat segmentation for body composition measures on quantitative CT.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Article
- Accuracy and Robustness of Bone Volume Fraction Assessment by Photon-Counting, Dual-Energy, and Quantitative CT using Micro-CT as Standard of Reference.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Volumetric Bone Mineral Density Assessed by Dual-Energy CT Predicts Bone Strength Suitability for Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Feasibility of 100 kV Low-voltage Bone Mineral Density Measurement with Quantitative CT: Phantom and Clinical Research.Calcified tissue international · 2025Article
- A three-material model for dual-layer detector spectral computed tomography measurements of marrow adipose tissue and bone mineral density.JBMR plus · 2025Article
- Radiation Diagnostics of the Maxillofacial Region and Skeleton Bone Density in the Case of Vitamin D Insufficiency: A Pilot Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A comparative study of bone density in elderly people measured with AI and QCT.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Biomechanical perspectives on image-based hip fracture risk assessment: advances and challenges.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Review
- Comparison of bone mineral density quantification in dogs using spectral detector computed tomography versus phantom-based conventional computed tomography.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Bone density measurement in patients with spinal metastatic tumors using chest quantitative CT deep learning model.Journal of bone oncology · 2024Article
- Performance of calcium quantifications on low-dose photon-counting detector CT with high-pitch: A phantom study.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis using enhanced images based on dual-energy computed tomography material decomposition: a comparison with quantitative computed tomography.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications for Osteoporosis Classification Using Computed Tomography.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDual-source dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) offers the potential for opportunistic osteoporosis screening by enabling phantomless bone mineral density (BMD) quantification. This study sought to assess the accuracy and precision of volumetric BMD measurement using dual-source DECT in comparison to quantitative CT (QCT).
methodsA validated spine phantom consisting of three lumbar vertebra equivalents with 50 (L1), 100 (L2), and 200 mg/cm
resultsDECT-derived BMD values differed significantly from those obtained by QCT (p < 0.001) and were found to be closer to true HA concentrations. Relative measurement errors were significantly smaller for DECT in comparison to QCT (L1, 0.94% versus 9.68%; L2, 0.28% versus 5.74%; L3, 0.24% versus 3.67%, respectively). DECT demonstrated better BMD measurement repeatability compared to QCT (coefficient of variance < 4.29% for DECT, < 6.74% for QCT). Both methods correlated well to each other (r = 0.9993; 95% confidence interval 0.9984-0.9997; p < 0.001) and revealed substantial agreement in Bland-Altman plots.
conclusionsPhantomless dual-source DECT-based BMD assessment of lumbar vertebra equivalents using material decomposition showed higher diagnostic accuracy compared to QCT.
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.