ReviewDer Radiologe2015
[Sonographic fracture diagnostics].
Review in Der Radiologe, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- [Sonography of fractures in childhood-Practice-oriented case examples of frequent entities].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- [Sonography of fractures in childhood-Practice-oriented case examples of frequent entities].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Review
- Ultrasound imaging in diagnostics of Monteggia lesion in children.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2022Article
- [X-ray diagnostics of fractures in childhood and adolescence-Consensus report of the scientific working group of the pediatric traumatology section of the German Society for Trauma Surgery (DGU)].Der Unfallchirurg · 2021Article
- [Fracture classification-part 1 : Modern low-dose radiation imaging in pediatric traumatology].Der Radiologe · 2020Review
- Abuse as a Cause of Childhood Fractures.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn clinically suspected fractures taking radiographs is the standard procedure but the indications should be strictly limited. Ultrasound offers a safe and radiation-free alternative for fracture diagnostics.
objectivesSensitivity and specificity of sonographic fracture diagnostics and safety of sonographic algorithms for fracture evaluation.
methodsPresentation of useful applications for sonographic fracture evaluation and establishment of sonographic algorithms for safe fracture diagnosis.
resultsIn children distal forearm fractures can be diagnosed solely by ultrasound (sensitivity 96 % and specificity 97 %). The sonographic fat pad sign (SOFA) has been proven to be a useful primary screening tool for occult fractures of the pediatric elbow. A positive fat pad sign (SOFA+) is indicative of a fracture and radiographic diagnostics are necessary (sensitivity 97 % and specificity 91 %). Ultrasonography is also useful to exclude subcapital humeral fractures (sensitivity 94 % and specificity 100 %) and for correct estimation of displacement when present.
conclusionsSonographic algorithms for fracture evaluation (SAFE) offer a safe diagnosis and guidance of the therapeutic course of certain pediatric fractures, thereby reducing unnecessary radiation exposure.
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.