Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29229563›Full record

ReviewOsteoarthritis and cartilage2018

Osteoarthritis year in review 2017: clinical.

A E Nelson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 178 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
178citing papers in PubMed, 12 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Effect of 10.6-μm COJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

118 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

A E NelsonThurston Arthritis Research Center and School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7280, USA. Electronic address: aenelson@med.unc.edu.

Funding

NIAMS Multidisciplinary Clinical Research CenterP60AR064166 · NIAMS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI CALLAHAN, LEIGH FLEMING · 2013 to 2017
$5.8M
NIAMS NIH HHS P60 AR064166
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review is based on a systematic review of the literature relevant to clinical topics in osteoarthritis (OA) performed for the time period February 22, 2016 to April 1, 2017. A PubMed search using the terms "osteoarthritis" and "treatment or epidemiology" returned over 800 papers, of which 57 are reviewed here, with inclusion primarily based on relevance to clinical OA. Epidemiologic studies in this time frame focused on the incidence and prevalence of OA, comorbidities and mortality in relation to OA (particularly obesity and cardiovascular disease), and multiple joint involvement. Papers on therapeutic approaches to OA considered: non-pharmacologic options, a number of topical, oral, and intra-articular therapies, as well as the cost-effectiveness of some OA treatments. There an enormous need to identify novel strategies to reduce the impact of this highly prevalent and debilitating condition.

Indexed as

HumansOsteoarthritisEpidemiologyOsteoarthritisSystematic reviewTreatment

Identifiers

PMID29229563
PMCPMC5835411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.