ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2020
Nonsensus in the treatment of proximal humerus fractures: uncontrolled, blinded, comparative behavioural analysis between Homo chirurgicus accidentus and Macaca sylvanus.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 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.
- Osteoporotic Fractures of the Proximal Humerus: an In-Depth Review of Current Management Options.Current osteoporosis reports · 2025Review
- Nonoperative treatment of proximal humerus fractures in the elderly.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Review
- Conservative Versus Operative Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures in Older Individuals.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the inter-rater reliability of Barbary macaques compared with an expert group of surgeons for the choice of treatment and predicted outcome of proximal humerus fractures.
designUncontrolled, blinded, comparative behavioural analysis.
settingGermany and United States.
participants10 blinded experts in the field of orthopaedic trauma surgery (
main outcome measuresThe reliability of agreement between raters assessed with Fleiss' ĸ.
resultsBarbary macaques seem to have inferior inter-rater reliability in comparison with experts for choice of treatment (non-surgical
conclusionsConsensus on treatment and expected outcomes of proximal humeral fractures is lacking even beyond the human species. Although Barbary macaques tend to predict the clinical outcome more accurately, their reliability to assist surgeons in making a consistent decision is limited. Future high quality research is needed to guide surgeons' decision making on the optimal treatment of this common injury.
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.