ArticleDer Orthopade2020
[Expert assessment of lower extremity prosthetics].
Article in Der Orthopade, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- [From functional assessment to estimating the reduction in earning capacity : A three-step guide to medicolegal assessment in orthopedics and trauma surgery within German statutory accident insurance].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- [Motion analysis in lower limb exoprosthetics-possibilities and limitations].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- [Expert proof of the individual benefit in the case of a disputed prosthesis supply].Der Orthopade · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the number of major amputations is declining throughout Germany, more than 57,000 surgical procedures for amputation still take place. As a consequence of high prosthetic care costs, these often lead to disputes before the social court in which expert medical opinions are required. With knowledge of the legal norms, the remit of the expert opinion can be fulfilled. The expert begins with evaluation of the patient's file and a search of the contested parts. The investigation includes a medical history, in addition to a physical examination, in order to be able to comment on the disputed beneficial use of the therapeutic appliance and respond to questions of proof. Questionnaires may be helpful.
Indexed as
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.