ArticleBMC medical ethics2024
Telling the truth to patients before hip fracture surgery.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and internal validation of prediction model for 90-day mortality in older patients with hip fracture using admission blood parameters.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Expedient truth-telling in the ICU: a qualitative content analysis.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Pre-fracture functional status and 30-day recovery predict 5-year survival in patients with hip fracture: findings from a prospective real-world study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHip fracture repair surgery carries a certain mortality risk, yet evidence suggests that orthopedic surgeons often refrain from discussing this issue with patients prior to surgery.
aimThis study aims to examine whether orthopedic surgeons raise the issue of one-year post-surgery mortality before hip fracture repair surgery and to explore factors influencing this decision.
methodThe study employs a cross-sectional design, administering validated digital questionnaires to 150 orthopedic surgeons.
resultsA minority of orthopedic surgeons reported always informing patients about the risk of mortality in the year following hip fracture surgery. The main reasons for not discussing this risk were a desire to avoid frightening patients, time constraints, and concerns about undermining patient hope. Orthopedic surgeons reported a medium-high level of perceived self-efficacy, with higher self-efficacy associated with a reduced likelihood of discussing one-year mortality risk. Conversely, older age and holding a specialist status in orthopedic surgery were associated with an increased likelihood of discussing this risk with patients.
conclusionsThese findings suggest a need for interventions to address communication barriers and ensure consistent provision of essential information to patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Additionally, they highlight the importance of considering individual factors such as self-efficacy, age, and expertise in designing strategies to improve patient-provider communication in orthopedic care settings.
trial registrationThe study doesn`t report the results of a health care intervention.
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.