ArticleJournal of digital imaging2017
Online Studies on Variation in Orthopedic Surgery: Computed Tomography in MPEG4 Versus DICOM Format.
Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2017. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Survival Prediction in Glioblastoma Patients using Advanced MRI Techniques.Current medical imaging · 2026Pooled it
- Variation in radial head fracture treatment recommendations in terrible triad injuries is not influenced by viewing two-dimensional computed tomography.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2023Article
- Agreement on fixation of pediatric supracondylar humerus fractures.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
- Reliability of Diagnosis of Partial Union of Scaphoid Waist Fractures on Computed Tomography.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the observer participation and satisfaction as well as interobserver reliability between two online platforms, Science of Variation Group (SOVG) and Traumaplatform Study Collaborative, for the evaluation of complex tibial plateau fractures using computed tomography in MPEG4 and DICOM format. A total of 143 observers started with the online evaluation of 15 complex tibial plateau fractures via either the SOVG or Traumaplatform Study Collaborative websites using MPEG4 videos or a DICOM viewer, respectively. Observers were asked to indicate the absence or presence of four tibial plateau fracture characteristics and to rate their satisfaction with the evaluation as provided by the respective online platforms. The observer participation rate was significantly higher in the SOVG (MPEG4 video) group compared to that in the Traumaplatform Study Collaborative (DICOM viewer) group (75 and 43%, respectively; P < 0.001). The median observer satisfaction with the online evaluation was seven (range, 0-10) using MPEG4 video compared to six (range, 1-9) using DICOM viewer (P = 0.11). The interobserver reliability for recognition of fracture characteristics in complex tibial plateau fractures was higher for the evaluation using MPEG4 video. In conclusion, observer participation and interobserver reliability for the characterization of tibial plateau fractures was greater with MPEG4 videos than with a standard DICOM viewer, while there was no difference in observer satisfaction. Future reliability studies should account for the method of delivering images.
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.