Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26568715›Full record

ReviewHand (New York, N.Y.)2015

A structured review addressing the use of radiographic measures of alignment and the definition of acceptability in patients with distal radius fractures.

Emily A Lalone, Ruby Grewal, Graham J W King, Joy C MacDermid

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Experience with patient-specific guides, insteatientad of general surgical experience, improves the accuracy of 3D-guided corrective osteotomies.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Long-term patient-reported outcomes after nonoperative treatment of distal radial fractures: what CT-based gaps and step-offs can be accepted?European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025
    Article
  6. Osteoporotic Distal Radius Fracture: Surgical Care.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Emily A LaloneClinical Research Laboratories, Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St Joseph's Healthcare London, London, Ontario Canada ; School of Rehabilitation Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario Canada.
Ruby GrewalClinical Research Laboratories, Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St Joseph's Healthcare London, London, Ontario Canada ; The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario Canada.
Graham J W KingClinical Research Laboratories, Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St Joseph's Healthcare London, London, Ontario Canada ; The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario Canada.
Joy C MacDermidClinical Research Laboratories, Roth McFarlane Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St Joseph's Healthcare London, London, Ontario Canada ; School of Rehabilitation Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario Canada ; The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStandard radiographs are routinely used in clinical care to characterize the severity of a distal radius fracture and to monitor patients following a distal radius fracture. The objective of this review was to describe the range and variability of radiographic measures described in the literature in patients following a distal radius fracture.

methodsA structured literature review was conducted using the Embase and PubMed databases. Inclusion criteria included full-text publications which employed radiographic measures to examine 100 or more participants following a distal radius fracture. A standardized data extraction form was used to identify study design, fracture classification systems, the types of and definitions of radiographic measurements, and acceptability criteria following distal radius fractures.

resultsFrom an initial 263 studies, 31 studies were included in the final data extraction process. A narrative synthesis of the articles included in this review indicated that there was a set of commonly used radiographic measurements examined in patients with a distal radius fracture which included radial inclination, volar/dorsal tilt, intra-articular step/gap, and a measure of ulnar variance/radial shortening. While 52 % of studies referenced or published a standardized measurement technique, there was substantial variability in the actual description of each radiographic measurement performed.

conclusionsSubstantial variability in how radiographic measurements are defined in large clinical studies as seen in this review suggest a need for consensus on the assessment and interpretations of radiographic measures used in patients following a distal radius fracture. Guidelines for radiographic measures should be established to ensure consistency between research and treatment centers.

Indexed as

AlignmentDistal radiusFracturesRadiographicStructured reviewX-ray

Identifiers

PMID26568715
PMCPMC4641087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.