ArticlePloS one2024
Specific pelvic shape in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip on 3D morphometric homologous model analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- Analysis of the kinematic features of pelvic and lower limb motion in patients with hip osteoarthritis and acetabular dysplasia.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
purposeTo clarify the morphological factors of the pelvis in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), three-dimensional (3D) pelvic morphology was analyzed using a template-fitting technique.
methodsThree-dimensional pelvic data of 50 patients with DDH (DDH group) and 3D pelvic data of 50 patients without obvious pelvic deformity (Normal group) were used. All patients were female. A template model was created by averaging the normal pelvises into a symmetrical and isotropic mesh. Next, 100 homologous models were generated by fitting the pelvic data of each group of patients to the template model. Principal component analysis was performed on the coordinates of each vertex (15,235 vertices) of the pelvic homologous model. In addition, a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated from the sensitivity of DDH positivity for each principal component, and principal components for which the area under the curve was significantly large were extracted (p<0.05). Finally, which components of the pelvic morphology frequently seen in DDH patients are related to these extracted principal components was evaluated.
resultsThe first, third, and sixth principal components showed significantly larger areas under the ROC curves. The morphology indicated by the first principal component was associated with a decrease in coxal inclination in both the coronal and horizontal planes. The third principal component was related to the sacral inclination in the sagittal plane. The sixth principal component was associated with narrowing of the superior part of the pelvis.
conclusionThe most important factor in the difference between normal and DDH pelvises was the change in the coxal angle in both the coronal and horizontal planes. That is, in the anterior and superior views, the normal pelvis is a triangle, whereas in DDH, it was more like a quadrilateral.
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.