ArticleJournal of orthopaedics
Interobserver and intraobserver variations in radial head fracture classification-assessment of two classification systems.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Radial Head Fractures: Is the Mason Classification Still Effective Today? A Large-Sample Validation of Intra- and Inter-Observer Reliability.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- A proposal for computed tomography-based algorithm for the management of radial head and neck fractures: the Proximal and Articular Radial fractures Management (PARMa) classification.JSES international · 2025Article
- Reliability of the CURL classification for proximal ulna fracture-dislocations of the elbow.JSES international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the intra- and interobserver variation of two classification systems for radial head fractures (Mason and Charalambous classifications) using plain radiographs. MATERIAL AND
methodsFive observers classified 30 radial head fractures as per the two classifications using anteroposterior and lateral elbow radiographs. Assessments were done on two occasions, at least 6 weeks apart.
resultsThe interobserver and intraobserver variation of the Mason classification showed fair (mean kappa = 0.33) and moderate agreement (mean kappa = 0.43) respectively. The interobserver and intraobserver variation of the Charalambous classification showed moderate agreement for both (mean kappa = 0.42 and 0.49 respectively). A greater proportion of radial head fractures could be classified using the Charalambous classification compared with the Mason classification (P < 0.001). With the Charalambous classification, the inter-observer variation was better when assessing fracture morphology (4 morphology groups) versus fracture displacement (2 displaced/un-displaced groups) (p = 0.010).
conclusionsThe Mason and Charalambous classifications for radial head fractures confer similar reliability when using plain radiographs, but the latter allows a greater proportion of fractures to be classified. Raters may agree more on fracture morphology as compared to fracture displacement. Our findings also demonstrate the limitations of using plain radiographs in classifying radial head fractures for clinical or research purposes, and suggest that evaluation with more sensitive modalities such as Computed Tomography may be preferable.
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.