Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37801160›Full record

ReviewJournal of experimental orthopaedics2023

ESSKA consensus initiative: why, when and how?

Philippe Beaufils, David Dejour, Giuseppe Filardo, Joan Carles Monllau, Jacques Menetrey, Romain Seil, Roland Becker

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Management of first-time patellar dislocation: The ESSKA 2024 formal consensus-Part 2.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
  8. The use of injectable orthobiologics for knee osteoarthritis: A formal ESSKA-ORBIT consensus. Part 2-Cell-based therapy.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
  9. A custom ChatGPT can accurately answer questions from an international expert osteotomy consensus statement.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Management of first-time patellar dislocation: The ESSKA 2024 formal consensus-Part 1.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Philippe BeaufilsESSKA Consensus Projects Advisor, 11 Rue Jacques Boyceau, 78000, Versailles, France. drphilippebeaufils@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3551-6360
David DejourLyon-Ortho-Clinic Clinique Sauvegarde Ramsay Santé, 29 Avenue Des Sources, 69009, Lyon, France.
Giuseppe FilardoApplied and Translational Research (ATR) Center, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Joan Carles MonllauDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Jacques MenetreyCentre de Médecine du Sport et de L'Exercice - Swiss Olympic Medical Center, Hirslanden Clinique La Colline, Geneva, Switzerland.
Romain SeilDivision of Neurosciences and Musculoskeletal Diseases, Centre Hospitalier Luxembourg, Luxembourg City, Luxembourg.
Roland BeckerDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, University of Brandenburg, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of a Consensus in clinical practice is to provide daily practitioners with evidence- based recommendations on data from the literature, clinical expertise and expectations of professionals and patients. In this context, a consensus aligns with the principles of evidence-based medicine in clinical practice and is consequently regarded as a scientific work of a certain level of evidence (LOE). It is expected that such a project may contribute to filling the gap observed between scientific evidence and reality of the daily practice.A Clinical Consensus is particularly needed for those topics that are of interest to daily practice but controversial due to lack of evidence, and for which expert agreement can provide valuable support in reaching conclusions.A Consensus requires a strict methodology, based on two principles: an iterative process with independence of the involved groups and pluralism (geographical and professional representation). These processes guarantee the scientific quality of the recommendations.Among the various consensus modalities, ESSKA has adopted the Formal Consensus derived from the Delphi method, and the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. These two methods are complementary. The first one, based on questions-answers sets, is particularly suitable for questions of terminology, diagnosis, planning, strategy. The second one is based on the concept of scenarios, particularly adapted to treatment indications. These two methods can also be used within the same consensus.The aim of this article is to define what is a consensus initiative, to detail the methodology ESSKA has chosen, and to point out the key role of the dissemination.

Indexed as

ConsensusDelphi methodFormal ConsensusGuidelinesRAND/UCLA Appropriateness method

Identifiers

PMID37801160
PMCPMC10558408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.