ReviewJournal of medical radiation sciences2026
Exploring the Clinical Potential of Dynamic Digital Radiography: A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dynamic Digital Radiography (DDR) is an emerging X-ray technology that captures anatomical motion through rapid sequential imaging, typically at 15 frames per second. By enabling real-time visualisation of physiological processes, DDR offers functional insights that extend beyond the capabilities of traditional static radiography. This literature review evaluates current evidence on DDR's clinical applications, with particular attention to pulmonary assessment, cardiac motion analysis and orthopaedic evaluations. Recent advances in post-processing software, including motion quantification and enhanced visual analytics, further support DDR's potential utility in a range of clinical settings. Findings from existing studies indicate that DDR provides meaningful functional information that may assist clinicians in evaluating disease progression, monitoring treatment response and identifying subtle dynamic abnormalities. Its portability and relatively low radiation dose are notable advantages, especially for patients with limited mobility or for point-of-care use. DDR has shown diagnostic performance comparable to established modalities such as CT, conventional radiography and fluoroscopy in selected applications, suggesting value as a complementary imaging tool. Nevertheless, the review also highlights important limitations. Current research is constrained by small study populations and limited long-term data. Although DDR offers versatility and unique dynamic imaging capability, its ability to outperform established modalities is unclear, making its suitability as a replacement in routine clinical practice uncertain. Broader adoption will require further large-scale, standardised studies to establish diagnostic accuracy, reproducibility and cost-effectiveness. Overall, DDR represents a promising adjunct to existing imaging technologies. Its ability to capture real-time anatomical motion positions it as a valuable emerging tool with the potential to enhance functional assessment and expand imaging accessibility across varied clinical environments.
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.