ArticleThe journal of knee surgery2016
Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy for Meniscal Tears: A Review and Commentary on a Study by NEJM.
Article in The journal of knee surgery, 2016. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus placebo surgery for a degenerative meniscus tear: a 2-year follow-up of the randomised controlled trial.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2018Trial
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) has been demonstrated to be effective when performed in the appropriately indicated patient. However, a recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) questioned whether or not the procedure actually had any clinical benefit whatsoever. Despite being a prospective, Level 1, randomized study, there are several aspects of the study that must be taken into consideration when interpreting the findings, including but not limited to the patient selection criteria, limited sample size, and lack of information regarding meniscal tear patterns. This study will critically review the recently published NEJM article, as well as analyze and assess the current body of APM literature.
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.