ArticleJBMR plus2026
Phantomless calibration of glenoid trabecular bone density: improved accuracy using age-stratified reference tissue densities.
Article in JBMR plus, 2026. 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
Evaluation of glenoid trabecular bone quality is important for patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty, as the density of the glenoid bone is likely to influence implant stability. Routine CT scans show promise for quantitative bone density assessments, but CT-based calibration typically involves scanning a phantom, which limits its application in clinical practice and in retrospective research studies. Here, we developed and validated a phantomless BMD measurement technique to evaluate glenoid trabecular bone density (mg/cc) using clinical shoulder CT scans of 88 patients (48 males, 40 females; mean age: 53 years). Air, fat, and muscle tissue were used as internal density references to develop patient-specific calibration functions for glenoid BMD estimation. The phantomless calibration was validated by comparison with an asynchronous phantom-based calibration using the European Spine Phantom. A Bland-Altman analysis yielded a mean difference of 0.37 mg/cc (95% CI: [-1.39, 2.14] mg/cc) between the two methods. Further improvement in internal calibration accuracy was achieved by implementing an age-stratified approach (two age groups; cut-off 55 years) to account for age-related declines in muscle density. With age stratification of reference tissue densities, the mean difference between internal and phantom-based calibration was reduced to 0.20 mg/cc (95% CI: [-1.38, 1.78] mg/cc). The proposed phantomless calibration approach provides a robust and clinically feasible method to evaluate glenoid trabecular bone density in both research and clinical applications. Moreover, the results highlight the importance of considering patient-specific variations in shoulder muscle density to ensure accurate internal calibration.
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.