Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17622544›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2008

An X-ray template assessment for distal radial fractures.

P V van Eerten, R Lindeboom, A E Oosterkamp, J C Goslings

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

4 authors.

P V van EertenDepartment of Surgery/Traumatology, Máxima Medical Center, PO Box 90052, 5600 PD Eindhoven, The Netherlands. p.vaneerten@mmc.nl
R Lindeboom
A E Oosterkamp
J C Goslings

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current method for radiological measurements on plain X-rays of distal radius fractures is unreliable. We examined the reproducibility of a new X-ray assessment technique-where the uninjured side is used as a template for the injured side-compared to the conventional assessment technique.

methodsX-rays of 30 patients with a unilateral distal radial fracture were included reflecting the prevalence of AO fracture types in clinical practice. Eight experienced observers assessed these X-rays on two separated occasions (2-month interval) using the traditional measurement technique and the template technique. Reproducibility of the X-ray assessments was quantified by intraclass correlations and weighted kappa coefficients.

resultsThe reproducibility of the radial length measurement did not improve nor did the volar angulation measurement. However, marked improvement in reproducibility was observed for the radial inclination measurement, the kappa increased from 0.36 (95 % CI; 0.30-0.41) to 0.49 (95 % CI; 0.43-0.55) in the template technique. As a result, the classification of the reduction results (Lidström score) greatly improved. The overall kappa for the Lidström score improved from 0.37 (95 % CI; 0.31/0.43) to 0.59 (0.52/0.63).

conclusionThe assessment technique using the uninjured side as a template for the injured side resulted only in an improved reproducibility of the radial inclination measurement which in turn resulted in an improved classification reproducibility of the reduction results.

Indexed as

AdolescentHumansRadiographyRadius FracturesReproducibility of ResultsTechnology, Radiologic

Identifiers

PMID17622544
PMCPMC2225998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.