ArticleScientific reports2015
The comparative risk of developing postoperative complications in patients with distal radius fractures following different treatment modalities.
Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of the quality of distal radius systematic reviews: Methodology and reporting assessment.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Assessment of Distal Radius Fracture Complications Among Adults 60 Years or Older: A Secondary Analysis of the WRIST Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2019Trial
- Kirschner's Wire versus Casts in Wrist Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of wrist surgery · 2025Article
- Identification of a novel three-column classification for double-column die-punch fractures of the distal radius.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of seven most common surgical procedures to fix DRF, including bridging external fixation, non-bridging external fixation, K-wire fixation, plaster fixation, dorsal plating, volar plating, and dorsal and volar plating. Published studies were retrieved through PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. The database search terms used were the following keywords and MeSH terms: DRF, bridging external fixation, non-bridging external fixation, K-wire fixation, plaster fixation, dorsal plating, volar plating, and dorsal and volar plating. The network meta-analysis was performed to rank the probabilities of postoperative complication risks for the seven surgical modalities in DRF patients. This network meta-analysis included data obtained from a total of 19 RCTs. Our results revealed that compared to DRF patients treated with bridging external fixation, marked differences in pin-track infection (PTI) rate were found in patients treated with plaster fixation, volar plating, and dorsal and volar plating. Cluster analysis showed that plaster fixation is associated with the lowest probability of postoperative complication in DRF patients. Plaster fixation is associated with the lowest risk for postoperative complications in DRF patients, when compared to six other common DRF surgical methods examined.
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.