Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26735922›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Meta-Analysis of a Complex Network of Non-Pharmacological Interventions: The Example of Femoral Neck Fracture.

Jonathan Mosseri, Ludovic Trinquart, Rémy Nizard, Philippe Ravaud

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jonathan MosseriINSERM U1153, Paris, France.
Ludovic TrinquartINSERM U1153, Paris, France.
Rémy NizardAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Lariboisière, Service de Chirurgie orthopédique et traumatologique, Paris, France.
Philippe RavaudINSERM U1153, Paris, France.
Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgical interventions raise specific methodological issues in network meta-analysis (NMA). They are usually multi-component interventions resulting in complex networks of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with multiple groups and sparse connections. PURPOSE: To illustrate the applicability of the NMA in a complex network of surgical interventions and to prioritize the available interventions according to a clinically relevant outcome.

methodsWe considered RCTs of treatments for femoral neck fracture in adults. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov up to November 2015. Two reviewers independently selected trials, extracted data and used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias. A group of orthopedic surgeons grouped similar but not identical interventions under the same node. We synthesized the network using a Bayesian network meta-analysis model. We derived posterior odds ratios (ORs) and 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs) for all possible pairwise comparisons. The primary outcome was all-cause revision surgery.

resultsData from 27 trials were combined, for 4,186 participants (72% women, mean age 80 years, 95% displaced fractures). The median follow-up was 2 years. With hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a comparison, risk of surgical revision was significantly higher with the treatments unthreaded cervical osteosynthesis (OR 8.0 [95% CrI 3.6-15.5] and 5.9 [2.4-12.0], respectively), screw (9.4 [6.0-16.5] and 6.7 [3.9-13.6]) and plate (12.5 [5.8-23.8] and 7.8 [3.8-19.4]).

conclusionsIn older women with displaced femoral neck fractures, arthroplasty (HA and THA) is the most effective treatment in terms of risk of revision surgery. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO no. CRD42013004218. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Network Meta-Analysis, Level 1.

Indexed as

Femoral FracturesFracture HealingHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReoperationRiskTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID26735922
PMCPMC4703382
OpenAlexW2231307587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.