ArticleJournal of children's orthopaedics2021
Reproducibility and reliability analysis of the Luk Distal Radius and Ulna Classification for European patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
Article in Journal of children's orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCurrent clinical and radiological methods of predicting a patient's growth potential are limited in terms of practicality, accuracy and known to differ in different races. This information influences optimal timing of bracing and surgical intervention in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). The Luk classification was developed to mitigate limitations of existing tools. Few reliability studies are available and are limited to certain geographical regions with varying results. This study was performed to analyze reproducibility and reliability of the Luk Distal Radius and Ulna Classification in European patients.
methodsThis is a radiological study of 50 randomly selected left hand and wrist radiographs of patients with AIS referred to a tertiary referral centre. They were assessed for bone maturity using the Luk Distal Radius and Ulna Classification. Assessment was performed twice by four examiners at an interval of one month. Statistical analysis was performed using the intraclass correlation (ICC) method to determine the reliabilities within and between the examiners.
resultsIn total, 50 radiographs (M:F = 13:37) with a mean age of 13.7 years (10 to 18) were assessed for reliability. The inter-rater ICC value was 0.918 for radius assessment and 0.939 for ulna assessment. The intra-rater ICC values for radius assessment ranged between 0.897 and 0.769 and between 0.948 and 0.786 for ulna assessment. There was near perfect correlation for both assessments.
conclusionThis study provides independent evidence that the Luk Distal Radius and Ulna Classification is a reliable tool for assessment of skeletal maturity for European patients. Minimal clinical experience is required to reliably utilize it. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
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.