ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
A novel alphanumeric classification system for ankle fractures: clinical applications and evaluation.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Functional Outcome on Different Surgical Treatment Modalities of Bimalleolar Fractures in Adults.Cureus · 2026Article
- Functional outcome in mini-fragment plating of the fibula in unstable ankle fractures.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to introduce and evaluate the Descriptive Ankle Fracture Classification (DAFC) system, a novel alphanumeric method for categorizing ankle fractures and fracture dislocations, and to assess its reliability and prognostic value compared to traditional classification systems (AO/OTA, Weber, and Lauge-Hansen). MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective review was conducted on 90 patients who underwent surgical treatment for ankle fractures. Four observers of varying experience levels classified the fractures using the DAFC, AO/OTA, Weber, and Lauge-Hansen classification systems. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability were evaluated using Fleiss' Kappa coefficient. Functional outcomes were assessed with the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) and Olerud Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) systems, and comparisons were made across classification systems to determine prognostic value.
resultsThe DAFC system demonstrated superior interobserver reliability, particularly for medial malleolus fractures (Kappa = 0.935-0.954) and syndesmotic injuries (Kappa = 0.873-0.891), compared to the other systems. Intraobserver reliability was consistently high across all categories in the DAFC system, with Kappa values ranging from 0.967 to 1.000. Functional outcomes revealed significant associations with the DAFC classification: patients with complete dislocation (D2) had significantly lower AOFAS and OMAS scores than those without dislocation (D0) (P = 0.011), and those with larger posterior malleolus fractures (P2) had poorer OMAS scores (P = 0.014). No statistically significant differences in AOFAS or OMAS scores were observed across AO/OTA, Weber, or Lauge-Hansen classifications.
conclusionsThe DAFC system offers a reliable and comprehensive framework for ankle fracture classification, with the added benefit of prognostic insights, particularly regarding dislocation and posterior malleolus involvement. Its high interobserver and intraobserver reliability, even among observers with varying experience, suggests that the DAFC system is valuable for clinical use. Future research should focus on validating these findings in larger cohorts and assessing the DAFC system's impact on long-term patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Retrospective cohort.
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.