ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Progress of fracture mapping technology based on CT three-dimensional reconstruction.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Morphological Study of Weber Type A Lateral Malleolar Fractures.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Three-dimensional fracture mapping of the mandible: a retrospective CBCT-based analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Quantitative three-dimensional fracture mapping reveals subtype-specific morphology of acetabular roof column and wall fractures.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Management Strategies for Failed Pilon Fractures: A Personalized Approach to Revision Reconstruction.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Morphological characteristics of spiral tibial shaft fractures involving the distal articular surface: a retrospective observational study.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Mapping of Patellar Fracture Patterns: A Multicenter Study of 237 Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fracture Mapping is a new technology developed in recent years. This technology visually representing the morphology of fractures by overlaying fracture lines from multiple fracture models onto a standard model through three-dimensional reconstruction. Fracture mapping has been widely used in acetabular fracture, proximal humerus fractures, Pilon fracture, tibial plateau fractures, and so on. This technology provides a new research method for the diagnosis, classification, treatment selection, internal fixation design, and statistical analysis of common fracture sites. In addition, the fracture map can also provide a theoretical basis for the establishment of a biomechanical standardized fracture model. Herein, we reviewed various methods and the most advanced techniques for fracture mapping, and to discuss the issues existing in fracture mapping techniques, which will help in designing future studies that are closer to the ideal. Moreover, we outlined the fracture morphology features of fractures in various parts of the body, and discuss the implications of these fracture mapping studies for fracture treatment, thereby providing reference for research and clinical decision-making on bone and joint injuries to improve patient prognosis.
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.