SynthesisJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025
Reasons for Downgrading the Certainty of Evidence for Indirectness in Synthesis of Surgical Procedures for Patients With Fractures: A Meta-Research Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleIndirectness occurs when the synthesized evidence may not be directly applied to the relevant clinical context. A common argument used by surgeons is that evidence that arises from clinical trials is limited due to a lack of fidelity regarding surgery techniques, materials, and surgeon and center experience. Considering that there are many particularities in surgical interventions for the treatment of bone fractures, diverseness is expected among trials that randomized patients to compare surgical procedures. An in-depth analysis of how this expected diverseness is reflected in indirectness judgments on the certainty of synthesized evidence is lacking. AIMS AND
objectivesTo analyze the certainty of evidence from all Cochrane reviews of surgical interventions for the treatment of patients with bone fractures and the reasons for indirectness downgrading.
methodA meta-research analysis of all Cochrane systematic reviews that compare any surgical interventions in patients with any type of bone fracture. A sensitive search was conducted in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Review from inception to 16 October 2024.
resultsThe certainty of the evidence of all Cochrane reviews of surgical interventions for patients with fractures is very low or low in 66.5% of eligible outcomes. Indirectness contributed to the certainty downgrade in only 12.26% of outcomes (26/212), and of those, the indirectness was related to the intervention in 11.5% (4/26). The results show that although the certainty of evidence of surgical interventions for patients with fractures is usually downgraded, indirectness is not a common cause of concern.
conclusionThe certainty of evidence for surgical interventions in patients with fractures is typically downgraded, often to very low. However, indirectness is not a common reason for such downgrading. The anticipated diverseness regarding surgery techniques, materials, and surgeon and center experience was not impactful in the overall certainty of evidence in the Cochrane reviews that were included.
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.