The role of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of occult scaphoid fractures.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Diagnostic performance of cone-beam computed tomography for scaphoid fractures: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2021
   Pooled it
2. Diagnostic accuracy of history taking, physical examination and imaging for phalangeal, metacarpal and carpal fractures: a systematic review update.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020
   Pooled it
3. What is the role of ultrasonography in the early diagnosis of scaphoid fractures?European journal of radiology open · 2021
   Review

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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract