Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38112093›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine2024

The effect of femur positioning on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measures and statistical shape and appearance modeling (SSAM) fracture risk assessments.

Ali Ammar, Fatemeh Jazinizadeh, Jonathan D Adachi, Cheryl E Quenneville

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. The effect of file type and DXA protocol on an image processing fracture risk prediction tool.Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ali AmmarSchool of Biomedical Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Fatemeh JazinizadehDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Jonathan D AdachiDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Cheryl E QuennevilleSchool of Biomedical Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1636-2631
McMaster University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnosis of osteoporosis using Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) relies on accurate hip scans, whereby variability in measurements may be introduced by altered patient positioning, as could occur with repeated scans over time. The goal herein was to test how altered postures affect diagnostic metrics (i.e., standard clinical metrics and a newer image processing tool) for femur positioning. A device was built to support cadaveric femurs and adjust their orientation in 3° increments in flexion and internal/external rotation. Seven isolated femurs were scanned in six flexion postures (0° (neutral) to 15° of flexion) and eleven rotational postures (15° external to 15° internal rotation) while collecting standard clinical DXA-based measures for each scan. The fracture risk tool was applied to each scan to calculate fracture risk. Two separate one-way repeated measures ANOVAs (α = 0.05) were performed on the DXA-based measures and fracture risk prediction output. Flexion had a significant effect on T-score, Bone Mineral Density (BMD), and Bone Mineral Content (BMC), but not area, at angles greater than 12°. Internal and external rotation did not have a significant effect on any clinical metric. Fracture risk (as assessed by the image processing tool) was not affected by either rotation mode. Overall, this suggests clinicians can adjust patient posture to accommodate discomfort if deviations are less than 12 degrees, and the greatest care should be taken in flexion. Furthermore, the tool is relatively insensitive to postural adjustments, and as such may be a good option for tracking risk over repeated patient scans.

Indexed as

Fractures, BoneOsteoporosisAbsorptiometry, PhotonBone DensityFemurHumansRisk Assessmentareabone mineral contentbone mineral densityDual-energy X-ray absorptiometryposturestatistical shape and appearance modelingT-score

Identifiers

PMID38112093
PMCPMC10799542
OpenAlexW4389958309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.