ArticleBMC medical imaging2023
Comparison of cone beam computed tomography and plane radiographs of radial fractures as a basis for radiographical measurements.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2023. 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.
- Accuracy of 3D radiological skull measurements: reoriented sections and geometric correction versus caliper reference.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Cone beam CT in the imaging of musculoskeletal trauma: a scoping review.Skeletal radiology · 2025Article
- Trends in the Use of Weightbearing Computed Tomography.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to determine whether radiological measurements of radial fracture position made in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) projection images are comparable to those made on traditional radiographs and could potentially substitute them.
methodsSixteen patients with fractures of the distal radius referred for radiographs were recruited for an additional CBCT scan which was performed immediately afterwards. Projection images and volumetric data were saved from the CBCT scans. Measurements of ulnar variance, radial inclination and volar tilt were made from all three sets of images.
resultsAgreement of projection image based measurements with radiographs was nearly as good as as the agreement of cross sectional image measurements with radiographs. The average difference between the results for projection images and radiographs were -1.2 mm (SD 1.9 mm), for radial inclination 0.7° (SD 2.9°) and for volar tilt 1.9° (SD 5.6°).
conclusionDifferences between radiological measurements between the modalities studied are small and projection images could be used for the assessment of distal radial fractures.
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.