ArticleCureus2025
A Study on the Femoral Neck-Shaft Angle in an Adult Sample From Andhra Pradesh: Osteological and Radiological Measurements.
Article in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The femoral neck-shaft angle (NSA) is a crucial anatomical parameter that plays a significant role in hip biomechanics, lower limb alignment, and load distribution across the hip joint. Variations in femoral NSA are linked to orthopedic conditions and have implications for surgical planning, prosthetic design, and forensic analysis. This study aimed to assess the femoral NSA in an adult sample from Andhra Pradesh using both osteological and radiological methods and to evaluate its variations based on side, gender, and age. An observational study was conducted from September to November 2024 at Guntur Medical College in Guntur and Government Medical College in Ongole in Andhra Pradesh, India. The study was conducted using osteological measurements from 113 dry femora (54 left, 59 right) and radiological measurements from 30 standardized anteroposterior digital X-rays of adult subjects aged between 20 and 80 years. Femoral NSA was measured bilaterally using a goniometer and image analysis software. Age- and gender-wise analyses were not possible for osteological measurements. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics software, version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Independent t-tests assessed side- and gender-based differences, while one-way ANOVA evaluated age-related variation. Pearson's correlation was employed to compare measurement methods, with a p-value of less than 0.05 considered statistically significant. In osteological assessment, the mean NSA was 116.54° ± 7.81° on the left and 119.93° ± 3.85° on the right, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.0047). In radiological measurements, the NSA was 141.15° ± 6.97° (left) and 137.50° ± 5.72° (right), also significant (p = 0.0307). In the radiological measurement, gender-based analysis showed a significant difference in females (p = 0.0385) but not males (p = 0.376). Age-wise, significant right-to-left NSA differences were observed across all age groups, which were 20 to 40 years (p = 0.039), 41 to 60 years (p = 0.048), and 61 to 80 years (p = 0.041). A positive correlation was observed between the two methods (r = 1.0), indicating measurement consistency. The study establishes normative femoral NSA values for the adult sample from Andhra Pradesh and highlights significant side-specific, gender-based, and age-related variations. The positive correlation between both methods (limited to bilateral variations) supports their reliability in clinical and anatomical assessments. These findings may offer crucial primary reference data for orthopedic procedures, prosthetic alignment, and regional forensic profiling. Future studies with larger, demographically stratified samples and clinical variables are recommended to refine and validate these observations.
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.