ArticleBMC medicine2015
Feasibility of individual patient data meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery.
Article in BMC medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cerebroplacental ratio in predicting adverse perinatal outcome: a meta-analysis of individual participant data.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic analysis of controlled clinical trials using the NiTi CAR™ compression ring in colorectal anastomoses.Techniques in coloproctology · 2017Pooled it
- Protecting patient privacy in tabular synthetic health data: a regulatory perspective.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- A consensus privacy metrics framework for synthetic data.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Augmenting Insufficiently Accruing Oncology Clinical Trials Using Generative Models: Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Tuberculosis-Associated Respiratory Disability in Children, Adolescents, and Adults: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Utility and Privacy of Synthetic Breast Cancer Clinical Trial Data Sets.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023Article
- A method for generating synthetic longitudinal health data.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- Status, use and impact of sharing individual participant data from clinical trials: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Article
- Optimizing the synthesis of clinical trial data using sequential trees.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Statistical analyses and quality of individual participant data network meta-analyses were suboptimal: a cross-sectional study.BMC medicine · 2020Article
- Plasma chitotriosidase activity versus CCL18 level for assessing type I Gaucher disease severity: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis of individual participant data.Systematic reviews · 2017Article
- Retrieval of Individual Participant Data for Exercise Meta-Analyses May Not Be Worth the Time and Effort.BioMed research international · 2016Article
- Exercise and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Children and Adolescents With Obesity: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.American journal of lifestyle medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe number of individual patient data meta-analyses published is very low especially in surgical domains. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery by determining whether trialists agree to send IPD for eligible trials.
methodsWe performed a literature search to identify relevant research questions in orthopaedic surgery. For each question, we developed a protocol synopsis for an IPD meta-analysis and identified all related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with results published since 2000. Corresponding authors of these RCTs were sent personalized emails that presented a project for an IPD meta-analysis corresponding to one of the research questions, with a link to the protocol synopsis, and asking for IPD from their RCT. We guaranteed patient confidentiality and secure data storage, and offered co-authorship and coverage of costs related to extraction.
resultsWe identified 38 research questions and 273 RCTs related to these questions. We could contact 217 of the 273 corresponding authors (79 %; 56 had unavailable or non-functional email addresses) and received 68/273 responses (25 %): 21 authors refused to share IPD, 10 stated that our request was under consideration and 37 agreed to send IPD. Four corresponding authors required authorship and three others asked for financial support to send the IPD. Overall, we could obtain IPD for 5,110 of 33,602 eligible patients (15 %). Among the 38 research questions, only one IPD meta-analysis could be potentially initiated because we could receive IPD for more than 50 % of participants.
conclusionThe present study illustrates the difficulties in initiating IPD meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery. Significant efforts must be made to improve data sharing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.