ReviewInternational orthopaedics2017
History of clubfoot treatment, part I: From manipulation in antiquity to splint and plaster in Renaissance before tenotomy.
Review in International orthopaedics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Surgical Correction of Late-Presenting Severely Deformed Foot in a Patient with Myelomeningocele.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- From Codivilla to Ponseti: historical narrative review on clubfoot treatment in Italy.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Review
- Clubfoot management in the Middle East: a survey-based review.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Review
- The Iron Man of the Renaissance: the contribution of Girolamo Fabrizi d'Acquapendente.International orthopaedics · 2020Article
- Paediatric orthopaedics through paintings.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2018Article
- History of club-foot treatment; part II: tenotomy in the nineteenth century.International orthopaedics · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Idiopathic clubfoot is one of the most common problems in paediatric orthopaedics. The treatment is controversial and continues to be one of the challenges in paediatric orthopaedics. The aim of this review is to assess the different methods of clubfoot treatment used over the years in light of the documentation present in the literature and art paintings from the antiquity to the end of the 19th century. The aim of this paper is to review all treatment methods of the clubfoot over the years that were proposed to provide patients a functional, pain-free, normal-looking foot, with good mobility, without calluses, and requiring no special shoes. Hippocrates was the first to write references about treatment methods of clubfoot. After the Middle Ages and the Renaissance where patients were treated by barber-surgeons, quacks and charlatans, bonesetters, and trussmakers, there were more detailed studies on the disease, with the help of famous names in medicine such as Venel and Scarpa.
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.