Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25593964›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2014

Applying evidence-based medicine principles to hip fracture management.

Joseph Bernstein, Saam Morshed, David L Helfet, Mohit Bhandari, Jaimo Ahn

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Joseph BernsteinDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, PA , USA.
Saam MorshedDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California San Francisco , San Francisco, CA , USA.
David L HelfetDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery , New York, NY , USA.
Mohit BhandariDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University , Hamilton, ON , Canada.
Jaimo AhnDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, PA , USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bone has the capacity to regenerate and not scar after injury - sometimes leaving behind no evidence at all of a prior fracture. As surgeons capable of facilitating such healing, it becomes our responsibility to help choose a treatment that minimizes functional deficits and residual symptoms. And in the case of the geriatric hip fracture, we have seen the accumulation of a vast amount of evidence to help guide us. The best method we currently have for selecting treatment plans is by the practice of evidence-based medicine. According to the now accepted hierarchy, the best is called Level I evidence (e.g., well performed randomized controlled trials) - but this evidence is best only if it is available and appropriate. Lower forms of accepted evidence include cohort studies, case control studies, case series, and case reports, and last, expert opinion - all of which can be potentially instructive. The hallmark of evidence-based treatment is not so much the reliance on evidence in general, but to use the best available evidence relative to the particular patient, the clinical setting and surgeon experience. Correctly applied, varying forms of evidence each have a role in aiding surgeons offer appropriate care for their patients - to help them best fix the fracture.

Indexed as

collective intelligenceevidence-based medicineexpert opinionfracturelevel of evidenceorthopedic traumasurgical decision making

Identifiers

PMID25593964
PMCPMC4286989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.