In vivo attachment site to attachment site length and strain of the ACL and its bundles during the full gait cycle measure by MRI and high-speed biplanar radiography. (Published Jan. 2, 2020).

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

1. A comparison of three methods for establishing an ACL reference length in vivo.Journal of biomechanics · 2024
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  In vivo attachment site to attachment site length and strain of the ACL and its bundles during the full gait cycle measured by MRI and high-speed biplanar radiography: Response.2020
• Comment on
  In vivo attachment site to attachment site length and strain of the ACL and its bundles during the full gait cycle measured by MRI and high-speed biplanar radiography.2020

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as