Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32782483›Full record

ArticleShoulder & elbow2020

Interobserver reliability of the classification of capitellar osteochondritis dissecans using magnetic resonance imaging.

Rens Bexkens, F Joseph Simeone, Denise Eygendaal, Michel Pj van den Bekerom, Luke S Oh, Shoulder and Elbow Platform

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Shoulder & elbow, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. [Treatment of osteochondritis dissecans].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  4. Longitudinal 3T MRI TJournal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2023
    Article
  5. Common Upper Extremity Injuries in Pediatric Athletes.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Rens BexkensDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sports Medicine Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6993-0941
F Joseph SimeoneDepartment of Radiology Division of Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Denise EygendaalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sports Medicine Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Michel Pj van den BekeromDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Luke S OhDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sports Medicine Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Shoulder and Elbow Platform

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aim(1) To determine the interobserver reliability of magnetic resonance classifications and lesion instability criteria for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans lesions and (2) to assess differences in reliability between subgroups.

methodsMagnetic resonance images of 20 patients with capitellar osteochondritis dissecans were reviewed by 33 observers, 18 orthopaedic surgeons and 15 musculoskeletal radiologists. Observers were asked to classify the osteochondritis dissecans according to classifications developed by Hepple, Dipaola/Nelson, Itsubo, as well as to apply the lesion instability criteria of DeSmet/Kijowski and Satake. Interobserver agreement was calculated using the multirater kappa (k) coefficient.

resultsInterobserver agreement ranged from slight to fair: Hepple (k = 0.23); Dipaola/Nelson (k = 0.19); Itsubo (k = 0.18); DeSmet/Kijowksi (k = 0.16); Satake (k = 0.12). When classifications/instability criteria were dichotomized into either a stable or unstable osteochondritis dissecans, there was more agreement for Hepple (k = 0.52; p = .002), Dipaola/Nelson (k = 0.38; p = .015), DeSmet/Kijowski (k = 0.42; p = .001) and Satake (k = 0.41; p < .001). Overall, agreement was not associated with the number of years in practice or the number of osteochondritis dissecans cases encountered per year (p > .05).

conclusionOne should be cautious when assigning grades using magnetic resonance classifications for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans. When making treatment decisions, one should rather use relatively simple distinctions (e.g. stable versus unstable osteochondritis dissecans; lateral wall intact versus not intact), as these are more reliable.

Indexed as

capitellumclassification systeminterobservermagnetic resonance imagingOsteochondritis dissecansreliability

Identifiers

PMID32782483
PMCPMC7400717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.