ArticleBone & joint research2019
The 'French paradox' may not be a paradox after all - but for what reason?
Article in Bone & joint research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is the French Paradox cementing philosophy superior to the standard cementing? A randomized controlled radiostereometric trial and comparative analysis.The bone & joint journal · 2022Trial
- A comparison of cemented femoral fixation via anterior versus posterior approach total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of 60,739 total hip arthroplasties.Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy · 2024Article
- [Current design and cement mantle thickness in hip arthroplasty : Theory and analysis of register data].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Quality of the femoral cement mantle in total hip arthroplasty using the direct anterior hip approach.Arthroplasty today · 2020Article
- Is cemented revision total hip arthroplasty a reasonable treatment option in an elderly population?Orthopedic reviews · 2019Article
- Five-year prospective subsidence analysis of 100 cemented polished straight stems: A concise clinical and radiological follow-up observation.Orthopedic reviews · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.