ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2025
CT of the medial clavicular epiphysis for forensic age estimation - raised arms position recommended.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiation dose reduction through short scan protocols and arms-out positioning in clavicular CT for forensic age estimation.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Development of an open-source 3D imaging method for forensic age estimation based on medial clavicular ossification: assessing area and volume ratios of epiphyses and metaphyses.International journal of legal medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effect of arm positioning on radiation dose, scan length, and image noise in computed tomography (CT) scans of the medial clavicular epiphysis for forensic age estimation performed with the arms alongside the body (arms-down) versus elevated above the head (arms-up).
methodsTwenty consecutive CT scans were analysed, ten performed with arms-down and ten with arms-up. The scans were conducted at 120 kVp and 37 mAs reference tube current. Scan length extended from 10 mm above to 10 mm below the medial clavicular epiphysis. Dose-relevant parameters (effective CT tube current, volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), CT dose length product (DLP), and effective dose) as well as scan length and image noise were compared between arms-up and arms-down CT scans.
resultsPopulation characteristics: 19 males, 1 female; mean weight 65.8 ± 9.2 kg; height 174.6 ± 7.8 cm; and body mass index (BMI) 21.6 ± 2.5 kg/m². Dose-relevant parameters were significantly lower with arms-up compared to arms-down (effective tube current: 80.9 ± 21.7 mAs vs. 146.0 ± 47.5 mAs, p = 0.001; CTDIvol: 5.5 ± 1.5 mGy vs. 9.9 ± 3.2 mGy, p = 0.001; DLP: 40.2 ± 13.7 mGy*cm vs. 63.8 ± 21.9 mGy*cm, p = 0.010; effective dose: 0.6 ± 0.2 mSv vs. 0.9 ± 0.3 mSv, p = 0.010). No significant differences were found in scan length, image noise, or population characteristics.
conclusionsRemoving the arms from the CT beam path reduced radiation dose by 33% without affecting scan length or image noise. Given the importance of dose optimisation in non-medical examinations of potentially minor individuals, CT scans of the medial clavicular epiphysis should be performed with arms elevated above the head.
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.