ReviewDer Unfallchirurg2021
[Typical liability damages of the upper extremities in childhood and their evaluation].
Review in Der Unfallchirurg, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Legal appraisal in childhood].Der Unfallchirurg · 2021Article
- Clinical application of upper limb fracture fixator in emergency treatment of upper limb fracture.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Legal appraisals of possible treatment errors in childhood and adolescence are rare, often refer to the treatment of trauma of the upper limbs and are frequently recognized. From the activity of the first author as an expert witness 31 expert opinions (25%) referred to the upper limbs. Supracondylar humeral fractures, radius neck fractures, radial condyle fractures and distal radius fractures were predominant. A primary treatment error was determined in 14 patients and a secondary error in 7 patients. This corresponds to a recognition rate of 68%. The aim of this study was the reflection and the development of a prevention strategy. Insufficient recognition of instability (radial condyle), inadequate reduction and inadequate stabilization (radius neck, supracondylar) as well as untreated malalignments and secondary dislocations (wrist) were the main reproaches. Poor communication and deficient documentation often aggravate the situation. Working along clear algorithms can help to avoid legal proceedings and assignment of guilt.
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.