ArticleActa orthopaedica2024
Outcomes and outcome measurement instruments in lower-limb lengthening surgery: a scoping review to inform core outcome set development.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Developing a core outcome set for acetabular fractures: a systematic review (part I).Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The effectiveness of post-lengthening plating after pediatric limb lengthening surgery: a comparative retrospective study.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2026Article
- Adjunctive Therapies in Long-Bone Distraction Osteogenesis: Clinical Evidence for Biophysical and Biologic Treatment Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative outcomes of Adam Frame and Ilizarov external fixator in pediatric lower limb deformity correction.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Applying machine learning to enhance core outcome set development: automating the data extraction and classification of outcomes.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Measuring more than just centimeters: a scoping review of outcome measures in cosmetic stature lengthening.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Review
- Outcomes and outcome measurement instruments in lower-limb lengthening surgery: a scoping review to inform core outcome set development.Acta orthopaedica · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe heterogeneous outcomes used in lower-limb lengthening surgery (LLLS) complicate evidence synthesis, weakening systematic reviews and clinical recommendations, and reducing research impact. This scoping review maps the outcomes and outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) used in LLLS.
methodsThis pre-registered review systematically identified studies reporting outcomes in adults or children who underwent LLLS. Outcomes and OMIs were extracted verbatim, and experts grouped outcome terms under headings using the COMET taxonomy.
resultsThe search found 5,308 unique hits, including 149 studies from 2020-2024. They reported 2,939 verbatim outcomes, which were consolidated into 92 outcome headings and 27 subheadings. "Life impact" accounted for 13%, while "Clinical outcomes" represented 83% of all outcomes. Among the clinical outcomes, "Musculoskeletal and connective tissue" was the most reported outcome domain (68% of all outcomes). The most frequently reported outcomes were "Lengthening," "Bone healing," "Range of motion," "Limb alignment", and "Complications."
conclusionOutcomes reported for people undergoing LLLS are heterogeneous and vary widely in the definitions and measurement tools used to collect them. Outcomes likely to be important to patients (life impact outcomes), such as quality of life and measures of physical function, are rarely reported.
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.