ArticleJSES international2025
Comparison of reliability in two-dimensional computed tomography vs. two-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging for on-track/off-track measurements: analysis of key values for glenohumeral bone loss.
Article in JSES international, 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
Background: The purpose of the current study was to compare the intraobserver and interobserver reliability in glenoid track measurement using two-dimensional (2D) computed tomography (CT) vs. 2D magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Our hypothesis was that on-track and off-track assessments using 2D CT and 2D MRI would demonstrate consistent results with good-to-excellent reliability. Methods: Electronic medical records from 2009 to 2019 were reviewed for patients with known shoulder instability and bipolar bone loss. Using 2D CT and 2D MRI, the glenoid and humeral head bone loss was measured to calculate the glenoid track and to assess for on-track and off-track lesions. Results: A total of 24 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall intraobserver reliability for 2D CT vs. 2D MRI was none to moderate for on-track and off-track assessments (κ = 0.083, 0.25, 0.5). Interobserver reliability for MRI scan was fair for on-track and off-track assessments (κ = 0.299). There was significant correlation between MRI and CT-derived measurements for all included variables ( Conclusion: On-track and off-track assessments using 2D CT and 2D MRI demonstrated inconsistent results; therefore, the additional information provided by 2D CT may be of significant value for clinical decision-making.
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.