ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2025
Comparison of bone mineral density quantification in dogs using spectral detector computed tomography versus phantom-based conventional computed tomography.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancing bone health evaluation in Hermann's tortoises (Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The generation of virtual monoenergetic images using spectral detector computed tomography (SDCT) may facilitate the measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) without the requirement of a phantom. This study has two primary objectives: (1) To compare the BMD values obtained from SDCT maps with those derived from phantom-calibrated values using quantitative computed tomography (QCT) in specific phantom densities and predetermined locations in canine subjects; and (2) to assess the reproducibility, measurement precision, and the potential bias associated with phantom-based measurements. Materials and methods: SDCT examinations of 49 dogs included a phantom containing four hydroxyapatite inserts. BMD values were manually measured in 18 anatomical locations. A linear model was used to convert Hounsfield units to BMD values (mg/cm Results: The statistical analysis demonstrated consistently lower BMD values derived from SDCT data within the phantom volume of interest. However, when compared to QCT, higher BMD values were noted across all anatomical sites. QCT data provided BMD values closer to the density of the phantom, while SDCT data appeared to be less sensitive to phantom positioning and body weight. The absolute differences in phantom values were influenced by the number of voxels without completely correcting the generally observed differences in the measured values. Conclusion: BMD values from both methods demonstrated significant systematic differences, highlighting the need for further research to optimize SDCT for clinical use.
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.