Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31340972›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Predicting patient-reported and objectively measured functional outcome 6 months after ankle fracture in people aged 60 years or over in the UK: prognostic model development and internal validation.

David J Keene, Karan Vadher, Keith Willett, Dipesh Mistry, Matthew L Costa, Gary S Collins, Sarah E Lamb

Open access · goldAbstract readEquivalence TrialMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Clinical relevance of current patient-reported outcome measures for ankle fracture: surgeons' perspective.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. [Factors associated with functionality in patients with closed ankle fracture].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2023
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Observational
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David J KeeneNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7249-6496
Karan VadherNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Keith WillettNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Dipesh MistryWarwick Clinical Trial Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Matthew L CostaNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Gary S CollinsCentre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sarah E LambNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 27294Department of Health PDF-2016-09-056
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo predict functional outcomes 6 months after ankle fracture in people aged ≥60 years using post-treatment and 6-week follow-up data to inform anticipated recovery, and identify people who may benefit from additional monitoring or rehabilitation.

designPrognostic model development and internal validation.

setting24 National Health Service hospitals, UK.

methodsParticipants were the Ankle Injury Management clinical trial cohort (n=618) (ISRCTN04180738), aged 60-96 years, 459/618 (74%) female, treated surgically or conservatively for unstable ankle fracture. Predictors were injury and sociodemographic variables collected at baseline (acute hospital setting) and 6-week follow-up (clinic). Outcome measures were 6-month postinjury (primary) self-reported ankle function, using the Olerud and Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), and (secondary) Timed Up and Go (TUG) test by blinded assessor. Missing data were managed with single imputation. Multivariable linear regression models were built to predict OMAS or TUG, using baseline variables or baseline and 6-week follow-up variables. Models were internally validated using bootstrapping.

resultsThe OMAS baseline data model included: alcohol per week (units), postinjury EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (VAS), sex, preinjury walking distance and walking aid use, smoking status and perceived health status. The baseline/6-week data model included the same baseline variables, minus EQ-5D-3L VAS, plus five 6-week predictors: radiological malalignment, injured ankle dorsiflexion and plantarflexion range of motion, and 6-week OMAS and EQ-5D-3L. The models explained approximately 23% and 26% of the outcome variation, respectively. Similar baseline and baseline/6 week data models to predict TUG explained around 30% and 32% of the outcome variation, respectively.

conclusionsPredictive accuracy of the prognostic models using commonly recorded clinical data to predict self-reported or objectively measured ankle function was relatively low and therefore unlikely to be beneficial for clinical practice and counselling of patients. Other potential predictors (eg, psychological factors such as catastrophising and fear avoidance) should be investigated to improve predictive accuracy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN04180738; Post-results.

Indexed as

Casts, SurgicalFracture Fixation, InternalPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresAgedAged, 80 and overAnkle FracturesCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisQuality of LifeRange of Motion, ArticularRecovery of Functionankle fracturesankle injuriesosteoporotic fracturesprognosis

Identifiers

PMID31340972
PMCPMC6661636
OpenAlexW2964010734

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.