ArticleTrials2020
A Combined Randomised and Observational Study of Surgery for Fractures In the distal Radius in the Elderly (CROSSFIRE): a statistical analyses plan.
Article in Trials, 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Plating vs Closed Reduction for Fractures in the Distal Radius in Older Patients: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA surgery · 2022Trial
- Article
- Surgical plating versus closed reduction for fractures in the distal radius in older patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis from the hospital perspective.ANZ journal of surgery · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors at 20 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe are performing a combined randomised and observational study comparing internal fixation to non-surgical management for common wrist fractures in older patients. This paper describes the statistical analysis plan. METHODS/
designA Combined Randomised and Observational Study of Surgery for Fractures In the distal Radius in the Elderly (CROSSFIRE) is a randomised controlled trial comparing two types of usual care for treating wrist fractures in older patients, surgical fixation using volar locking plates and non-surgical treatment using closed reduction and plaster immobilisation. The primary aim of this comparative-effectiveness study is to determine whether surgery is superior to non-surgical treatment with respect to patient-reported wrist function at 12 months post treatment. The secondary outcomes include radiographic outcomes, complication rates and patient-reported outcomes including quality of life, pain, treatment success and cosmesis. Primary analysis will use a two-sample t test and an intention-to-treat analysis using the randomised arm of the study. Statistical analyses will be two-tailed and significance will be determined by p < 0.05. Sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess for differences in intention-to-treat, per-protocol and as-treated analyses. Sensitivity analyses will also be conducted to assess selection bias by evaluating differences in participants between the randomised and observational study arms, and for bias relating to any missing data. An economic analysis will be conducted separately if surgery is shown to provide superior outcomes to a level of clinical significance. DISCUSSION: This statistical analysis plan describes the analysis of the CROSSFIRE study which aims to provide evidence to aid clinical decision-making in the treatment of distal radius fractures in older patients.
trial registrationCROSSFIRE was approved by The Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (HNEHREC Reference No: 16/02/17/3.04). Registered on 22 July 2016 with The Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR Number; ACTRN12616000969460 ). This manuscript is based on v.11 of the statistical analysis plan. A copy of v.11, signed by the chief investigator and the senior statistician is kept at the administering institution.
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.