ArticleSkeletal radiology2014
The development and implementation of an outcomes database for imaging-guided therapeutic musculoskeletal injections.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hip MRI findings and outcomes following imaging-guided hip injections.The British journal of radiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo present the process of creating an imaging-guided injections outcomes database and to reflect on how this database has affected the scientific activities of the radiology department. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe literature was searched to identify studies on the effectiveness of musculoskeletal therapeutic injections, areas where research is lacking, and relevant outcome measures. Validated outcome measures were chosen and tested in a pilot study. Data collection time points of 1 day, 1 week and 1 month post-injection were determined and the post-pilot study postal questionnaires were created. The data collection process began and has been ongoing for over 4 years. Critical reflection on the process and outcomes from the database occurred.
resultsThe 9 steps to creating this outcomes database are presented. The numerical rating scale for pain (NRS) and the Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) were identified as the most valid, reliable, and time-effective outcome measures. At most, 50% of patients return their postal questionnaire. The database has facilitated the publication of numerous research projects.
conclusionsSetting up an outcomes database is straightforward and productive. The NRS and PGIC were considered the most useful outcome measures. This database facilitated critical reflection on current practice and provides the foundation for several research studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24737087What 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.