ArticlePloS one2022
Alternative methods for skeletal maturity estimation with the EOS scanner-Experience from 934 patients.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relationship between the pelvic incidence and the modified Oxford Hip score: a computed tomographic analysis.Acta neurochirurgica · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHand-wrist bone age assessment methods are not possible on typical EOS 2D/3D images without body position modifications that may affect spinal position. We aimed to identify and assess lesser known bone age assessment alternatives that may be applied retrospectively and without the need for extra imaging. MATERIALS AND
methodsAfter review of 2857 articles, nine bone age methods were selected and applied retrospectively in pilot study (thirteen individuals), followed by evaluation of EOS images of 934 4-24-year-olds. Difficulty of assessment and time taken were recorded, and reliability calculated.
resultsFive methods proved promising after pilot study. Risser 'plus' could be applied with no difficulty in 89.5% of scans (836/934) followed by the Oxford hip method (78.6%, 734/934), cervical (79.0%, 738/934), calcaneus (70.8%, 669/934) and the knee (68.2%, 667/934). Calcaneus and cervical methods proved to be fastest at 17.7s (95% confidence interval, 16.0s to 19.38s & 26.5s (95% CI, 22.16s to 30.75s), respectively, with Oxford hip the slowest at 82.0 s (95% CI, 76.12 to 87.88s). Difficulties included: regions lying outside of the image-assessment was difficult or impossible in upper cervical vertebrae (46/934 images 4.9%) and calcaneus methods (144/934 images, 15.4%); position: lower step length was associated with difficult lateral knee assessment & head/hand position with cervical evaluation; and resolution: in the higher stages of the hip, calcaneal and knee methods.
conclusionsHip, iliac crest and cervical regions can be assessed on the majority of EOS scans and may be useful for retrospective application. Calcaneus evaluation is a simple and rapidly applicable method that may be appropriate if consideration is given to include full imaging of the foot.
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.