ArticleJBMR plus2024
Multi-site phantomless bone mineral density from clinical quantitative computed tomography in males.
Article in JBMR plus, 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.
- Comparisons of phantom-based and phantomless QCT bone mineral density for predicting subsequent fractures.Bone & joint research · 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
Volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) is commonly assessed using QCT. Although standard vBMD calculation methods require phantom rods that may not be available, internal-reference phantomless (IPL) and direct measurements of Hounsfield units (HU) can be used to calculate vBMD in their absence. Yet, neither approach has been systemically assessed across skeletal sites, and HU need further validation as a vBMD proxy. This study evaluated the accuracy of phantomless methods, including IPL and regression-based phantomless (RPL) calibration using HU to calculate vBMD, compared to phantom-based (PB) methods. vBMD from QCT scans of 100 male post-mortem human subjects (PMHS) was calculated using site-specific PB calibration at multiple skeletal sites throughout the body. A development sample of 50/100 PMHS was used to determine site-specific reference material density for IPL calibration and RPL equations. Reference densities and equations from the development sample were used to calculate IPL and RPL vBMD on the remaining 50/100 PMHS for method validation. PB and IPL/RPL vBMD were not significantly different (
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.