Observational studyMedicine2020
A retrospective evaluation of reliability and reproducibility of Arbeitsgemeinschaftfür Osteosynthesefragen classification and Fernandez classification for distal radius fracture.
Observational study in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Distal Radius Fracture Classifications in Real Life: Reliability and How They Change Treatment.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- Assessment of Reproducibility and Agreement of the IDEAL Classification for Distal Radius Fractures.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2024Article
- Relation between the dash score and radiographic evaluation of the wrist in patients with wrist fracture.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Temporary external fixation versus direct ORIF in complete displaced intra-articular radius fractures: a prospective comparative study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Observational
- Evaluation of Intra- and Interobserver Reproducibility of the New AO/OTA Classification for Distal Radius Fractures Compared with the Fernandez Classification.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2022Article
- Standard radiographic assessments of distal radius fractures miss involvement of the distal radioulnar joint: a diagnostic study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
- Association of secondary displacement of distal radius fractures with cortical bone quality at the distal radius.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2021Article
- Validity of classification of distal radial fractures in the Swedish fracture register.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This is a retrospective evaluated. The objective of this study was to test the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of fracture classification with Arbeitsgemeinschaftfür Osteosynthesefragen (AO) system and Fernandez system used by 5 senior orthopedic surgeons.Anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of 160 patients hospitalized for displaced distal radius fracture were examined. Independently, 5 orthopedic surgeons evaluated the radiographs according to 2 different distal radius classification systems (3 types of results). Three statistical tools were used to measure interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. The intraclass correlation coefficient and kappa coefficient (k) were used to assess both interobserver and intraobserver agreement of AO and Fernandez. Kappa value indicated poor agreement (<0), slight (0-0.20), fair (0.21-0.40), moderate (0.41-0.60), good (0.61-0.80), and perfect (0.81-1.00).The intraobserver reproducibility of AO system (9 types) and Fernandez system were moderate with a value of 0.577 and 0.438. The intraobserver reproducibility of AO system (27 subtypes) was 0.286. The interobserver reliability of AO system (9 types) was moderate with a value of 0.469 and that of Fernandez was moderate with a value of 0.435. The interobserver reliability of AO system (27 subtypes) was 0.299.Neither of the 2 systems can give us a satisfactory agreement between interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. In AO system, the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the 9 types decreased with the increase of subgroups.
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.