Diagnostic accuracy of radiography techniques for musculoskeletal disorders.

Rishabh Yadav, Rinku Choudhury, Abhijeet Alok, Mukesh Kumar, Amrita Pandita Bhatia, Tanvi Hirani, Rahul Tiwari

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Rishabh YadavDepartment of Radiology, Prasad Medical College, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Rinku ChoudhuryDepartment of General Medicine, PDU Medical College and Hospital, Churu, Rajasthan, India.

Abhijeet AlokDepartment of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Sarjug Dental College and Hospital, Darbhanga, Bihar, India.

Mukesh KumarDepartment of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Shree Bankey Bihari Dental College, Masuri, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Amrita Pandita BhatiaDepartment of Prosthodontics (Crown and Bridges and Implantology), YCCM and RDF's Dental College and Hospital, Ahilyanagar, Maharashtra, India.

Tanvi HiraniDepartment of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Karnavati University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.

Rahul TiwariDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, RKDF Dental College and Research Centre, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan University, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventional radiography often fails to detect early or subtle musculoskeletal pathology because of limited sensitivity and anatomical overlap. Therefore, it is of interest to study prospectively evaluated CR, DT, LDCT and MRI against a composite reference standard in a tertiary MSK unit. Hence, a total of 120 patients were included in the study, of which 54 had positive findings regarding clinically significant musculoskeletal pathology. MRI showed the highest sensitivities (98.1%) and overall accuracy (95.8%), followed by low-dose CT with sensitivity(s) of 81.5% and an accuracy of 90.0%. Tomosynthesis was superior to radiography for detection and offered a clinically useful intermediate alternative for indeterminate radiographs.

Indexed as

computed tomography (CT)magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)Musculoskeletal disorders (MSK)radiographytomosynthesis

Identifiers

PMID42145372

DOI10.6026/973206300221444

PMCPMC13177105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.