ArticleShoulder & elbow2021
Pre- and peroperative diagnosis of
Article in Shoulder & elbow, 2021. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Amplicon-Based Next-Generation Sequencing as a Diagnostic Tool for the Detection of Phylotypes ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Genomic Analysis ofMicroorganisms · 2021Article
- Can surgeons differentiate between painful shoulders that growShoulder & elbow · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
methodsPubMed/Embase were searched for diagnostic studies. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using QUADAS-2. Forest plots summarized results (sensitivity and specificity) for each pre- and peroperative diagnostic tool.
resultsTwenty-two studies were included, of which 8 described preoperative, 10 peroperative, and 4 both pre- and peroperative diagnostic tools. Quality of the studies varied widely. For preoperative tools, synovial calprotectin, interleukin-6, and combined interleukin-6/interleukin-2/tumor necrosis factor-α had the best efficacy measures. Pre-revision biopsies and arthroscopic tissue cultures were the best peroperative tools.
conclusionDespite a lack of evidence and the use of different LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review.
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.