ArticlePediatric radiology2024
Acceleration of skeletal maturation in Central Europe over the last two decades: insights from two cohorts of healthy children.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- External Validation of Deeplasia for Automated Bone Age Assessment Compared with Four Commercial AI Systems.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Risk factors and preventive strategies for precocious puberty: a narrative review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
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
backgroundDeviations between the determination of bone age (BA) according to Greulich and Pyle (G&P) and chronological age (CA) are common in Caucasians. Assessing these discrepancies in a population over time requires analysis of large samples and low intra-observer variability in BA estimation, both can be achieved with artificial intelligence-based software. The latest software-based reference curve contrasting the BA determined by G&P to the CA of Central European children dates back over two decades.
objectiveTo examine whether the reference curve from a historical cohort from the Netherlands (Rotterdam cohort) between BA determined by G&P and CA still applies to a current Central European cohort and derive a current reference curve. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective single-center study included 1,653 children and adolescents (aged 3-17 years) who had received a radiograph of the hand following trauma. The G&P BA estimated using artificial intelligence-based software was contrasted with the CA, and the deviations were compared with the Rotterdam cohort.
resultsAmong the participants, the mean absolute error between BA and CA was 0.92 years for girls and 0.97 years for boys. For the ages of 8 years (boys) and 11 years (girls) and upward, the mean deviation was significantly greater in the current cohort than in the Rotterdam cohort. The reference curves of both cohorts also differed significantly from each other (P < 0.001 for both boys and girls).
conclusionThe BA of the current Central European population and that of the curve from the Rotterdam cohort from over two decades ago differ. Whether this effect can be attributed to accelerated bone maturation needs further evaluation.
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.