Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19756904›Full record

SynthesisClinical orthopaedics and related research2010

Diagnosing suspected scaphoid fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zhong-Gang Yin, Jian-Bing Zhang, Shi-Lian Kan, Xiao-Gang Wang

Abstract readEvaluation StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 144 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Can we avoid casting for suspected scaphoid fractures? A multicenter randomized controlled trial.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. [Advances in diagnosis and treatment of acute scaphoid fractures].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2019
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zhong-Gang YinDepartment of Hand and Microsurgery, Tianjin Hospital, 300211 Tianjin, China. zgyin@hotmail.com
Jian-Bing Zhang
Shi-Lian Kan
Xiao-Gang Wang
Tianjin Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledImaging protocols for suspected scaphoid fractures among investigators and hospitals are markedly inconsistent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess and compare the diagnostic performance of bone scintigraphy, MRI, and CT for diagnosing suspected scaphoid fractures. Twenty-six studies were included. Sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were pooled separately and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were fitted for each modality. Meta-regression analyses were performed to compare these modalities. We obtained likelihood ratios derived from the pooled sensitivity and specificity and, using Bayes' theorem, calculated the posttest probability by application of the tests. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, natural logarithm of the diagnostic odds ratio, and the positive and negative likelihood ratios were, respectively, 97%, 89%, 4.78, 8.82, and 0.03 for bone scintigraphy; 96%, 99%, 6.60, 96, and 0.04 for MRI; and 93%, 99%, 6.11, 93, and 0.07 for CT. Bone scintigraphy and MRI have equally high sensitivity and high diagnostic value for excluding scaphoid fracture; however, MRI is more specific and better for confirming scaphoid fracture. We believe additional studies are needed to assess diagnostic performance of CT, especially paired design studies or randomized controlled trials to compare CT with MRI or bone scintigraphy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Indexed as

Databases, BibliographicDiagnostic ImagingFractures, BoneHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingOdds RatioPredictive Value of TestsRadionuclide ImagingScaphoid BoneTomography, X-Ray ComputedWrist Joint

Identifiers

PMID19756904
PMCPMC2816764
OpenAlexW2061049789

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.