ArticleBMJ open2020
Meniscal tear outcome Study (METRO Study): a study protocol for a multicentre prospective cohort study exploring the factors which affect outcomes in patients with a meniscal tear.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient beliefs and perceptions play a crucial role in the decision-making process when managing a meniscal tear. A qualitative systematic review of the literature.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Knee Injury Detection Using Deep Learning on MRI Studies: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Meniscal tears are more common than previously identified, however, less than a quarter of people with a tear undergo arthroscopy.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis study is designed to explore the baseline characteristics of patients under 55 years of age with a meniscal tear, and to describe the relationship between the baseline characteristics and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) over 12 months. Research has highlighted the need for a trial to investigate the effectiveness of arthroscopic meniscectomy in younger patients. Before this trial, we need to understand the patient population in greater detail. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre prospective cohort study. Participants aged between 18 and 55 years with an MRI confirmed meniscal tear are eligible for inclusion. Baseline characteristics including age, body mass index, gender, PROMs duration of symptoms and MRI will be collected. The primary outcome measure is the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool at 12 months. Secondary outcome measures will include PROMs such as EQ5D, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and patient global impression of change score at 3, 6 and 12 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study obtained approval from the National Research Ethics Committee West Midlands-Black Country research ethics committee (19/WM/0079) on 12 April 2019. The study is sponsored by the University of Warwick. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UHCW R&D Reference: IA428119. University of Warwick Sponsor ID: SC.08/18-19.
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.