ArticleANZ journal of surgery2025
Ultrasound for hip dysplasia - disparities between community and tertiary paediatric services.
Article in ANZ journal of surgery, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveExplore the differences in ultrasound reporting between community ultrasound centres and a high-volume paediatric tertiary centre in diagnosing developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).
participantsOne hundred infants less than 6 months of age from a paediatric hip registry, who underwent ultrasounds in both community and tertiary centres within a 2-week interval.
resultsOne percent of a 200-hip sample reported scan quality. Alpha angles were reported in 84.5% (n = 169) of community reports and 78.5% (n = 157) of tertiary centre reports. Femoral head coverage was reported similarly in both environments at 94.5% in community and 93.5% in tertiary. Beta angle appeared in 45% (n = 90) and 2% (n = 4), respectively. Bland Altman plots revealed that there existed variation in ultrasound interpretation especially in more dysplastic hips. The concordance correlation coefficient showed only moderate agreement (Rho = 0.60 for alpha angles, Rho = 0.61 for femoral head coverage), and interrater reliability on hip classification reached moderate agreement (Cohen's Kappa = 0.57 for alpha angle, and 0.45 for femoral coverage) between community and tertiary hospital reports.
conclusionsReliance on the community-acquired ultrasound report as a true reflection of the state of a hip is not completely justified. The lack of standardized reporting poses challenges for community clinicians in starting treatment or making appropriate referrals. Only a moderate agreement has been observed between the community and tertiary scans. Consequently, over 25% of hips classified as abnormal are potentially normal, and more than 15% dysplastic hips could be undetected.
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.