ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2025
Greater Detail Is Needed When Reporting Schenck Knee Dislocation V Injuries in the Orthopaedic Literature: A Systematic Review.
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnosis, Treatment, and Current Controversies in Multiligament Knee Injuries: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Article
- The role of hinged external fixation in the treatment of knee dislocation, subluxation and fracture-dislocation: A systematic review of indications.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To examine how knee dislocations (KDs) with associated periarticular fractures classified using the Schenck KD V subcategory are reported in the literature. Methods: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Scopus were queried in January 2024. Studies were included if full-text articles in English were available, the Schenck KD classification system was used, and Schenck KD class V was mentioned. The exclusion criteria were as follows: studies in which the Schenck KD classification system was used but only KD classes I to IV were mentioned; systematic reviews, meta-analyses, review articles, commentaries, surgical technique articles, or animal studies; or studies in which pediatric patients were included. Studies were systematically examined for details regarding the descriptions of KD V injuries, including fracture and ligament tear patterns. Results: Seventy-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these 74 studies, 45 (60.8%) provided no description of either the ligament tear or fracture patterns that were present in KD V injuries. Fifty-two studies (70.3%) provided no description of the ligament tear patterns and 51 studies (68.9%) provided no description of the fracture patterns associated with KD V injuries. Only 16 of 74 studies (21.6%) included descriptions of ligament tear patterns and fractures present in KD V injuries. Conclusions: Descriptions of Schenck KD class V are poorly represented in the orthopaedic literature. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level II to IV studies.
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.