ArticleImaging science in dentistry2022
Structural complexity of the craniofacial trabecular bone in multiple myeloma assessed by fractal analysis.
Article in Imaging science in dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated fractal analysis of trabecular bone in multiple myeloma: a macro-based radiographic study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Fractal Analysis of Mandibular Condyles in Patients with Temporomandibular Disorder.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the structural complexity of craniofacial trabecular bone in multiple myeloma by fractal analysis of panoramic and lateral skull radiography, and to compare the fractal dimension values of healthy patients (HPs), pre-treatment patients (PTPs), and patients during bisphosphonate treatment (DTPs). Materials and Methods: Pairs of digital panoramic and lateral skull radiographs of 84 PTPs and 72 DTPs were selected. After application of exclusion criteria, 43 panoramic and 84 lateral skull radiographs of PTPs, 56 panoramic and 72 lateral skull radiographs of DTPs, and 99 panoramic radiographs of age- and sex-matched HPs were selected. The fractal dimension values from panoramic radiographs were compared among HPs, PTPs, and DTPs and between anatomical locations within patient groups using analysis of variance with the Tukey test. Fractal dimension values from lateral skull radiographs were compared between PTPs and DTPs using the Student t-test. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to assess the relationship between the mandible from panoramic radiographs and the skull from lateral skull radiographs. Intra-examiner agreement was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (α=0.05). Results: The fractal dimension values were not significantly different among HPs, PTPs, and DTPs on panoramic radiographs or between PTPs and DTPs on lateral skull radiographs ( Conclusion: Fractal analysis was not sensitive for distinguishing craniofacial trabecular bone complexity in multiple myeloma patients using panoramic and lateral skull radiography.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.