Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31025808›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2019

Differences in Bone Mineral Density and Hip Geometry in Trochanteric and Cervical Hip Fractures in Elderly Chinese Patients.

Ming Li, Hou-Chen Lv, Jian-Heng Liu, Xiang Cui, Guo-Fei Sun, Jian-Wei Hu, Li-Cheng Zhang, Pei-Fu Tang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ming LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China.
Hou-Chen LvDepartment of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China.
Jian-Heng LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China.
Xiang CuiDepartment of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China.
Guo-Fei SunDepartment of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China.
Jian-Wei HuDepartment of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China.
Li-Cheng ZhangDepartment of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China.
Pei-Fu TangDepartment of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China.
Chinese PLA General Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the differences in bone mineral density (BMD) and hip geometry in trochanteric and cervical hip fractures in elderly Chinese patients.

methodsA consecutive series of 196 hip fracture patients aged over 50 years was recruited from November 2013 to October 2015, including 109 cases of cervical fractures (36 males and 73 females) and 87 cases of trochanteric fractures (34 males and 53 females). All patients were evaluated through dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and baseline characteristics, BMD and structural parameters were collected and reviewed.

resultsThere were statistically significant differences in age, height, and body mass index between patients with each type of fracture, and patients with trochanteric fractures were older than those with cervical fractures, especially in women. The BMD in trochanteric fractures was markedly lower than in cervical fractures in all five sites of the hip by an approximate reduction of 10%, in both men and women. The cross-sectional area, cross-sectional moment of inertia, and the cortical thickness in the cervical fracture group were significantly higher than in the trochanteric fracture group. However, the buckling ratio of both the femoral neck and trochanteric region were significantly lower in the cervical fracture group. Age (/10 years), cross-sectional moment of inertia in femoral neck and buckling ratio in trochanteric region were significant risk factors for trochanteric fractures compared with cervical fractures.

conclusionsCompared with cervical hip fractures, patients with trochanteric fractures were older, had a lower BMD, and had less bone mechanical strength, especially in female patients. Age, femoral neck cross-sectional moment of inertia (FNCSMI), and trochanteric region buckling ratio (ITBR) were stronger risk factors for trochanteric hip fractures than for cervical fractures.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAgedAge FactorsBone DensityFemaleHip FracturesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPelvic BonesRisk FactorsBone mineral densityCervical hip fracturesHip geometryTrochanteric fractures

Identifiers

PMID31025808
PMCPMC6594516
OpenAlexW2941221360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.