ArticleBMC medical imaging2025
Comparison of pointwise encoding time reduction with radial acquisition (PETRA) imaging with conventional MR imaging for the diagnosis of traumatic fractures in children.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to determine whether adding pointwise encoding time reduction with radial acquisition (PETRA) images to conventional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging improves the depiction and characterization of traumatic fractures in pediatric patients.
methodsTwenty-nine pediatric subjects with fractures and a control group of twenty individuals without fractures were included. Two independent observers assessed conventional MR, PETRA, and combined MRI + PETRA images, documenting the presence of fractures, bone fragments, callus formation, displacement, size, and angles of fractures.
resultsDiagnostic accuracy was higher for combined conventional MR with PETRA images than for conventional MR or PETRA alone in detecting fractures (area under curve (AUC): 0.86 for conventional MR, 0.97 for PETRA, 1.00 for combined), callus formation (AUC: 0.67 conventional MR, 0.82 PETRA, 0.86 combined), and bone fragments (AUC: 0.89 conventional MR, 0.96 PETRA, 0.97 combined). PETRA images improved agreement in detecting fractures, especially in the ulna/radius (κ = 0.46 conventional MR, 1.00 PETRA, 1.00 combined) and fibula/talus (κ = 0.42 conventional MR, 1.00 PETRA, 1.00 combined), compared to CT. PETRA also enhanced agreement in characterizing callus formation, bone fragments, displacement, size and fracture angles (intraclass correlation > 0.88 for all comparisons), compared to CT. Addition of PETRA images revealed that the differences in the measurements of fragment displacement, size, and fracture angle compared to CT, were not statistically significant (all p > 0.05).
conclusionAdding PETRA images to conventional MR enhances diagnostic accuracy and reliability in detecting fractures among pediatric patients compared to conventional MR alone. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.