ArticleScientific reports2022
Comparing two different automatic methods to measure femoral neck-shaft angle based on PointNet++ network.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Statistical shape modeling of the proximal femur bone for hip implant design optimization.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Automatic measurement of proximal femoral morphological parameters using point cloud semantic segmentation technology.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of outcomes of Salter and Varus osteotomies in the treatment of Legg-Calve-Perthes Disease: a retrospective cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
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
Accurate measurement of the femoral neck-shaft angle (NSA) is of great significance for diagnosing hip joint diseases and preoperative planning of total hip arthroplasty. However, the repeatability of manual measurements is not as satisfactory, and the difference between 2D and 3D measurements is not clear. The computer-aided method provides a platform for automatic and accurate measurement of the NSA. The femoral point cloud datasets from 310 subjects were segmented into three regions, including the femoral head, femoral neck, and femoral shaft using PointNet++. We created a projection plane to simulate the hip anteroposterior radiograph and fitted the femoral neck axis and femoral shaft axis to complete the 2D measurement, while we directly fitted the two axes in space to complete the 3D measurement. Also, we conducted the manual measurement of the NSA. We verified the accuracy of the segmentation and compared the results of the two automatic and manual methods. The Dice coefficient of femoral segmentation reached 0.9746, and MIoU of that was 0.9165. No significant difference was found between any two of the three methods. While comparing the 2D and 3D methods, the average accuracy was 98.00%, and the average error was 2.58°. This paper proposed two accurate and automatic methods to measure the NSA based on a 2D plane and a 3D model respectively. Although the femoral neck and femoral shaft axes did not intersect in 3D space, the NSAs obtained by 2D and 3D methods were basically consistent.
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.