Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37168029›Full record

ReviewOTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma2023

Great debates in trauma biomechanics.

Vaida Glatt, Robert O'Toole, Samir Mehta, William Ricci, Aaron Nauth, Emil Schemitsch, Michael W Hast

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma, 2023. 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Erratum: Great debates in trauma biomechanics-Erratum.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Vaida GlattDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, San Antonio, TX.
Robert O'TooleDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Maryland Medical System, Baltimore, MD.
Samir MehtaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PAA.
William RicciDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery and New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY.
Aaron NauthDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; and.
Emil SchemitschDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Michael W HastDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PAA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

At the 2021 annual meeting of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association, the Basic Science Focus Forum hosted its first ever debate-style symposium focused on biomechanics and fracture repair. The 3 subjects of debate were "Mechanics versus Biology-Which is 'More Important' to Consider?" "Locked Plate versus Forward Dynamization versus Reverse Dynamization-Which Way Should I Go?" and "Sawbones versus Cadaver Models-What Should I Believe Most?" These debates were held because fracture healing is a highly organized synergistic response between biological factors and the local mechanical environment. Multiple studies have demonstrated that both factors play roles in governing bone healing responses, and the causal relationships between the 2 remain unclear. The lack of clarity in this space has led to a spectrum of research with the common goal of helping surgeons make good decisions. Before reading further, the reader should understand that the questions posed in the debate titles are unanswerable and might represent a false choice. Instead, the reader should appreciate that the debates were held to gain a more thorough understanding of these topics based on the current state of the art of experimental and clinical studies, by using an engaging and thought-provoking format.

Indexed as

biomechanicsdebatediscussiontrauma

Identifiers

PMID37168029
PMCPMC10166369

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.