ArticleBMJ open2017
Evaluation of the geriatric co-management for patients with fragility fractures of the proximal femur (Geriatric Fracture Centre (GFC) concept): protocol for a prospective multicentre cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02297581 (A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study to Evaluate the Benefit of the Geriatric Fracture Center), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study to Evaluate the Benefit of the Geriatric Fracture Center (GFC) Concept
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for older people with hip fractures.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Association of orthogeriatric care models with evaluation and treatment of osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2020Pooled it
- Trial
- Adherence to Anti-Osteoporotic Treatment and Clinical Implications after Hip Fracture: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Design and Evaluation of a Hospital-Based Educational Event on Fracture Care for Older Adult.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results.BMJ open · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTreatment of fractures in the elderly population is a clinical challenge due partly to the presence of comorbidities. In a Geriatric Fracture Centre (GFC), patients are co-managed by a geriatrician in an attempt to improve clinical outcomes and reduce morbidity and mortality. Until now the beneficial effect of orthogeriatric co-management has not been definitively proven. The primary objective of this study is to determine the effect of GFC on predefined major adverse events related to a hip fracture compared to usual care centres (UCC). The secondary objectives include assessments in quality of life, patient-reported outcomes and cost-effectiveness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two hundred and sixty-six elderly patients diagnosedwith hip fracture and planned to be treated with osteosynthesis or endoprosthesis in either a GFC or UCC study site will be recruited, 133 per type of centre. All procedures and management will be done according to the site's standard of care. Study-related visits will be performed at the following time points: preoperative, intraoperative, discharge from the orthopaedic/trauma department, discharge to definite residential status, 12 weeks and 12 months postsurgery. Data collected include demographics, residential status, adverse events, patient-reported outcomes, fall history, costs and resources related to treatment. The risk of major adverse events at 12 months will be calculated for each centre type; patient-reported outcomes will be analysed by mixed effects regression models to estimate differences in mean scores between baseline and follow-ups whereas cost-effectiveness will be assessed using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval for this study was granted from the local Ethics Committees or Institutional Review Board from each of the participating sites prior to patient enrolment. The results of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at different conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02297581; pre-results.
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.