ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Validation of the Greulich and Pyle Atlas for Radiological Bone Age Assessments in a Pediatric Population from the Canary Islands.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brachydactyly Type A1 Caused by anReports (MDPI) · 2026Article
- Proof-of-concept comparison of an artificial intelligence-based bone age assessment tool with Greulich-Pyle and Tanner-Whitehouse version 2 methods in a pediatric cohort.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- Automated Bone Age Assessment and Adult Height Prediction from Pediatric Hand Radiographs via a Cascaded Deep Learning Framework.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
- Growth plate continuity on knee MRI predicts growth hormone effect in mid-to-late puberty with idiopathic short stature.Endocrine · 2025Article
- Risk factors for scoliosis progression in children with idiopathic short stature on growth hormone therapy.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone age assessments measure the growth and development of children and adolescents by evaluating their skeletal maturity, which is influenced by various factors like heredity, ethnicity, culture, and nutrition. The clinical standards for this assessment should be up to date and appropriate for the specific population being studied. This study validates the GP-Canary Atlas for accurately predicting bone age by analyzing posteroanterior left hand and wrist radiographs of healthy children (80 females and 134 males) from the Canary Islands across various developmental stages and genders. We found strong intra-rater reliability among all three raters, with Raters 1 and 2 indicating very high consistency (intra-class coefficients = 0.990 to 0.996) and Rater 3 displaying slightly lower but still strong reliability (intra-class coefficients = 0.921 to 0.976). The inter-rater agreement was excellent between Raters 1 and 2 but significantly lower between Rater 3 and the other two raters, with intra-class coefficients of 0.408 and 0.463 for Rater 1 and 0.327 and 0.509 for Rater 2. The accuracy analysis revealed a substantial underestimation of bone age compared to chronological age for preschool- (mean difference = 17.036 months;
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.