ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2022
Statistical Fragility of Single-Row Versus Double-Row Anchoring for Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies.
Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- The fragility of statistical findings in the intertrochanteric fracture fixation literature: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Pooled it
- The Statistical Fragility of Marrow Stimulation for Cartilage Defects of the Knee: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Cartilage · 2024Pooled it
- The fragility of statistical significance in distal femur fractures: systematic review of randomized controlled trials.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Pooled it
- Recurring low statistical robustness in orthopaedic surgery: A systematic review of 84 fragility index studies.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Kinematic vs. mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty: A statistical analysis of randomized control trials utilizing dichotomous and continuous fragility metrics.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
- A Narrative Review on the Double Pulley-Triple Row Technique for Large to Massive Rotator Cuff Repair.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2025Review
- Outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair via single-row anchor technique versus transosseous anchorless technique: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- Double-row suture-bridge technique does not yield better clinical and radiological results than single-row technique in patients older than 55 years at 2 years minimum follow-up: A comparative study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- The Fragility of Statistical Significance in the Use of Aspirin in Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism Events Following Total Joint Arthroplasty: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The Statistical Fragility of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Research: A Systematic Review.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Fragility analysis and systematic review of patellar resurfacing versus non-patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- The statistical fragility of the management options for reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of randomized control trial with fragility analysis.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2023Review
- Arthroscopic therapy of rotator cuff diseases: A bibliometric study of the past 2 decades (2002-2021).Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Comparative studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) often use the Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to examine the statistical stability of studies comparing single-row to double-row rotator cuff repair. It was hypothesized that the findings of these studies would be vulnerable to a small number of outcome event reversals, often fewer than the number of patients lost to follow-up. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We analyzed comparative studies and RCTs on primary single-row versus double-row rotator cuff repair that were published between 2000 and 2021 in 10 leading orthopaedic journals. Statistical significance was defined as a Results: Of 4896 studies screened, 22 comparative studies, 10 of which were RCTs, were ultimately included for analysis. A total of 74 outcomes were examined. Overall, the median FI was 2 (interquartile range [IQR], 1-3), and the median FQ was 0.035 (IQR, 0.020-0.057). The mean FI was 2.55 ± 1.29, and the mean FQ was 0.043 ± 0.027. In 64% of outcomes, the FI was less than the number of patients lost to follow-up.) Additionally, 81% of significant outcomes needed just a single outcome reversal to lose their significance. Conclusion: Over half of the studies currently used to guide clinical practice have a number of patients lost to follow-up greater than their FI. The results of these studies should be interpreted within the context of these limitations. Future analyses may benefit from the inclusion of the FI and the FQ in their statistical analyses.
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.