ArticleScientific reports2025
Distance mapping for quantifying contact surface area and inter-bone distance in wrist CT imaging: a comparative study of four methods.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When assessing osteoarthritis, the congruency of articular surfaces and cartilage integrity are crucial. Static or dynamic CT scanning and subsequent bone-to-bone distance mapping enables a non-invasive evaluation of these factors. Distance maps visualize local inter-bone distances and its extent can serve as a representation of the contact surface area within a joint. A contact surface area can be defined by applying distance and angle thresholds between adjacent bones. These thresholds may affect the selected contact area and therefore influence distance measures. Several methods for distance map generation use different distance measurement approaches, with or without an angle threshold. The impact of the chosen method and thresholds remains unclear. This study evaluates the sensitivity to threshold settings of different methods in radioscaphoid, radiolunate, and scapholunate joints. Static 3D-CT scans of twenty healthy and eleven pathological wrists were analyzed. A mixed effect model was conducted to compare the sensitivity of different methods using particular angle and distance thresholds. The method combining perpendicular distance and angle thresholds was shown to be the least sensitive to changing threshold values, resulting in the smallest variations in observed contact surface area and bone-to-bone distances.
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.