ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2021
Using the
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting Likelihood to Repeat Elective Hand Surgery with Early Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Scores: A Feasibility Study.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2025Article
- Outcomes in Patients with Bilateral Distal Radius Fractures.Journal of wrist surgery · 2025Article
- Trajectory of Recovery following ORIF for Distal Radius Fractures.Journal of wrist surgery · 2024Article
- Study of Hamate Fractures in a Single Tertiary Hands Unit: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Literature Review.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2024Article
- The Efficacy of WALANT Technique in the Management of Distal End Radius Fracture - A Case Series.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2024Article
- Use of Plain Radiography of Uninjured Wrists as Patient-Specific Markers of Successful Reduction of Unilateral Distal Radius Fractures.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum2021
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: There is a paucity of literature examining the trajectory of meaningful clinical improvement after distal radius fracture (DRF) fixation. We sought to answer the following questions: (1) When do patients meet the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in the Methods: We performed a retrospective review of an institutional database of DRF patients treated with operative fixation. The change in Results: The study included 173 patients. Mean Conclusions: Overall, 96% of patients undergoing DRF fixation will achieve one Type of study/level of evidence: Therapeutic 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.