284 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29852970)
1. A computerized method for evaluating scoliotic deformities using elliptical pattern recognition in X-ray spine images.
Pinheiro AP; Coelho JC; Veiga ACP; Vrtovec T
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2018 Jul; 161():85-92. PubMed ID: 29852970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Personalized X-ray 3-D reconstruction of the scoliotic spine from hybrid statistical and image-based models.
Kadoury S; Cheriet F; Labelle H
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2009 Sep; 28(9):1422-35. PubMed ID: 19336299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Quantitative analysis of spinal curvature in 3D: application to CT images of normal spine.
Vrtovec T; Likar B; Pernus F
Phys Med Biol; 2008 Apr; 53(7):1895-908. PubMed ID: 18364545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Three-dimensional reconstruction of the scoliotic spine and pelvis from uncalibrated biplanar x-ray images.
Kadoury S; Cheriet F; Dansereau J; Labelle H
J Spinal Disord Tech; 2007 Apr; 20(2):160-7. PubMed ID: 17414987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Three-dimensional measurement of wedged scoliotic vertebrae and intervertebral disks.
Aubin CE; Dansereau J; Petit Y; Parent F; de Guise JA; Labelle H
Eur Spine J; 1998; 7(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 9548361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An integrative framework for 3D cobb angle measurement on CT images.
Huo X; Tan JQ; Qian J; Cheng L; Jing JH; Shao K; Li BN
Comput Biol Med; 2017 Mar; 82():111-118. PubMed ID: 28183004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A hierarchical statistical modeling approach for the unsupervised 3-D biplanar reconstruction of the scoliotic spine.
Benameur S; Mignotte M; Labelle H; De Guise JA
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2005 Dec; 52(12):2041-57. PubMed ID: 16366228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical validation of coronal and sagittal spinal curve measurements based on three-dimensional vertebra vector parameters.
Somoskeöy S; Tunyogi-Csapó M; Bogyó C; Illés T
Spine J; 2012 Oct; 12(10):960-8. PubMed ID: 23018164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Classification of pelvic and spinal postural patterns in upright position. Specific cases of scoliotic patients.
Berthonnaud E; Dimnet J; Hilmi R
Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2009 Dec; 33(8):634-43. PubMed ID: 19635659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reliability assessment of Cobb angle measurements using manual and digital methods.
Tanure MC; Pinheiro AP; Oliveira AS
Spine J; 2010 Sep; 10(9):769-74. PubMed ID: 20359959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A mathematical expression of three-dimensional configuration of the scoliotic spine.
Kanayama M; Tadano S; Kaneda K; Ukai T; Abumi K
J Biomech Eng; 1996 May; 118(2):247-52. PubMed ID: 8738791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The correlation comparison of vertebral axial rotation relative to curvature and torsion in scoliosis by simplified 3D spine model.
Lin H
Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2006; 2006():1517-20. PubMed ID: 17945649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Three-dimensional (3-D) reconstruction of the spine from a single X-ray image and prior vertebra models.
Novosad J; Cheriet F; Petit Y; Labelle H
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2004 Sep; 51(9):1628-39. PubMed ID: 15376511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The reliability of quantitative analysis on digital images of the scoliotic spine.
Cheung J; Wever DJ; Veldhuizen AG; Klein JP; Verdonck B; Nijlunsing R; Cool JC; Van Horn JR
Eur Spine J; 2002 Dec; 11(6):535-42. PubMed ID: 12522710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessment of scoliotic deformity using spinous processes: comparison of different analysis methods of an ultrasonographic system.
Koo TK; Guo JY; Ippolito C; Bedle JC
J Manipulative Physiol Ther; 2014; 37(9):667-77. PubMed ID: 25282680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Sagittal spinal profile and spinopelvic balance in parents of scoliotic children.
Janssen MM; Vincken KL; van Raak SM; Vrtovec T; Kemp B; Viergever MA; Bartels LW; Castelein RM
Spine J; 2013 Dec; 13(12):1789-800. PubMed ID: 23819971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of 3-dimensional spinal reconstruction accuracy: biplanar radiographs with EOS versus computed tomography.
Glaser DA; Doan J; Newton PO
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Jul; 37(16):1391-7. PubMed ID: 22415001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cobb Angle Measurement of Spine from X-Ray Images Using Convolutional Neural Network.
Horng MH; Kuok CP; Fu MJ; Lin CJ; Sun YN
Comput Math Methods Med; 2019; 2019():6357171. PubMed ID: 30996731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Automatic Cobb angle determination from radiographic images.
Sardjono TA; Wilkinson MH; Veldhuizen AG; van Ooijen PM; Purnama KE; Verkerke GJ
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2013 Sep; 38(20):E1256-62. PubMed ID: 23797500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A biomechanical analysis of the vertebral and rib deformities in structural scoliosis.
Wever DJ; Veldhuizen AG; Klein JP; Webb PJ; Nijenbanning G; Cool JC; v Horn JR
Eur Spine J; 1999; 8(4):252-60. PubMed ID: 10483825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
