ReviewDer Unfallchirurg2018
[Osteoporosis in private accident insurance].
Review in Der Unfallchirurg, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osteoporosis is a multifactorial disease resulting in reduced bone strength and increased bone fragility. The cause of osteoporosis is underexplored. The manifestation of osteoporosis makes a significant contribution to the development of bone fractures. In the medical assessment, the question arises to what extent osteoporosis is considered to be a previous disability or in particular as a contributory factor. In particular, there are some uncertainties relating to the degree of possible participation, as there are only insufficient scientific evaluation systems. From the authors' point of view no valid assessment of the degree of participation exists on the basis of technical examinations or even the severity of the trauma. At the current time there is no possibility to indicate the level of contribution in 10% or 20% steps. Taking the total picture, including clinical and radiological findings into consideration, it seems possible to assess the contribution only in larger percentage steps (e.g. 0%, 50% or ≥80%). The mere diagnosis of osteoporosis does not justify a participation rate unless its effects can be pathomorphologically proven.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29230487What 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.