Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29209517›Full record

ArticleEFORT open reviews2017

Clinical course and recommendations for patients after anterior cruciate ligament injury and subsequent reconstruction: A narrative review.

Alli Gokeler, Bart Dingenen, Caroline Mouton, Romain Seil

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in EFORT open reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
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.

Alli GokelerUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Human Movement Science, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, The Netherlands.
Bart DingenenRehabilitation Research Institute, Biomedical Research Institute, Faculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, UHasselt, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Caroline MoutonDépartement de l'Appareil Locomoteur, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg - Clinique d'Eich, 76, rue d'Eich, L-1460 Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
Romain SeilDépartement de l'Appareil Locomoteur, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg - Clinique d'Eich, 76, rue d'Eich, L-1460 Luxembourg, Luxembourg and Sports Medicine Research Laboratory, Luxembourg Institute of Health, 76, rue d'Eich, L-1460 Luxembourg, Luxembourg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Almost all athletes who have suffered an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury expect a full return to sports at the same pre-injury level after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Detailed patient information on the reasonable outcomes of the surgery may be essential to improve patient satisfaction.Pre-operative rehabilitation before ACLR should be considered as an addition to the standard of care to maximise functional outcomes after ACLR.We propose an optimised criterion-based rehabilitation programme within a biopsychosocial framework.No benchmark exists for evaluating return-to-sport (RTS) readiness after ACLR. Therefore, the authors propose a multi-factorial RTS test battery. A combination of both physical and psychological elements should be included in the RTS test battery.There is need for shared decision-making regarding RTS. Cite this article:

Indexed as

anterior cruciate ligament injuryevaluation toolspost-operative carepost-operative rehabilitationpre-operative rehabilitationpsychological factorsreturn to sportstime of return to sports

Identifiers

PMID29209517
PMCPMC5702954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.