ArticleSkeletal radiology2026
Evaluation of ultra-low and low-dose CT skeletal survey for fracture detection in assessments for suspected non-accidental injury: a prospective post-mortem study.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2026. 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.
- Next-gen paediatric imaging: ultra-low dose chest photon-counting CT approaching chest radiograph doses.European radiology experimental · 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
objectiveThis prospective study aimed to evaluate the capabilities of two novel vertex-toes CT protocols (ultra-low and low-dose) compared to a standard high-dose CT protocol plus radiographic skeletal survey (SS) in a post-mortem setting. The study sought to assess perceived image quality (IQ) and the fracture detection capabilities of each CT protocol. MATERIALS AND
methodsParticipants aged 2 years and under received three whole-body CT scans, followed by a SS. Radiologists reviewed images in the sequence of ultra-low, low-dose, to standard-dose CT, then SS. The reviewers graded perceived IQ on a Likert scale. Gwet's agreement coefficient (AC)-2 and cumulative link mixed models quantified interobserver agreement and IQ differences, respectively. Fractures detected by each modality were compared across anatomical regions, with positive specific agreement (PSA) assessing interobserver agreement. Radiation doses were calculated for each CT protocol.
resultsSignificant differences in IQ ratings were observed across CT protocols for all anatomical regions (ribs [ultra-low-low], p = 0.0001; femur [ultra-low-low], p = 0.0001; all others, p < 0.001), alongside low interobserver agreement in IQ (lumbar spine [low-dose]-AC = 0.78; humerus [low-dose]-AC = 0.77; all others, AC < 0.7). Among 29 participants, 69 fractures were identified across modalities, all being detected by the standard-dose CT. Ultra-low and low-dose CT identified 62 (90%) of fractures detected using standard-dose CT. SS detected the fewest (17 (25%)), with the highest false-positive rate. Higher CT doses were associated with higher PSA values for fracture detection. Doses for UL and low-dose CTs were 1.3-2.3 mSv.
conclusionLow-dose CT improved fracture detection, reduced false positives, and delivered less radiation than a bone scan, highlighting its potential for use in clinical suspected non-accidental injury.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40728734What 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.