ArticleActa ortopedica brasileira2024
SHORTENING OF CLAVICLE FRACTURES: PHYSICAL
Article in Acta ortopedica brasileira, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Determine the reliability of three different methods of evaluating bone shortening in displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (DCMF). Method: A cross-sectional analytical study evaluated bone shortening by metric tape (MT), radiography (X-ray), and computed tomography (CT). Twenty-six men had been evaluated and used clavícula not broken as control. The collection of data was of the blind type for three specialists. Differences and reliability were analyzed with the Friedman and Kappa tests and validated with the T-test (CI: 95%; significance index p<0.05; Software "R" version 3.2.2). Results: The MT measurements (control) showed abnormal distribution and significant statistical difference concerning the imaging tests (p=0.000008). There was a similarity between X-ray and CT and Kappa agreement of 0.65. The fractured clavicles presented similar measurements between the three methods (p=0.059), and the T-tests proved that the similarity was caused by chance or possible measurement errors. Conclusion: Measurement by metric tape showed a tendency to overestimate bone shortening. The CT showed more reliable results for the diagnosis; however, the X-ray was sufficient for decision-making by surgeons, and therefore, it is not possible to rule out the importance of this resource for DCMF.
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.