SynthesisEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Quality assessment of prospective cohort and randomized controlled trials evaluating surgical treatment of proximal humerus fractures: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study offers a systematic review and quantitative evaluation of the methodological quality of prospective studies comparing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures.
methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines identifying prospective cohort studies or randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ORIF and RTSA for the management of traumatic proximal humerus fractures in skeletally mature patients. Two reviewers independently evaluated the methodologic quality and risk of bias of the included studies. Scarcity and heterogeneity of data precluded any pooled analysis from being performed.
resultsThe search yielded 1064 unique articles, of which five met inclusion criteria. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) score for the comparative prospective cohort studies ranged from 12 to 19, corresponding to low (1), moderate (1), and high (2) quality studies. The mean modified Coleman Methodology score of the lone RCT was 70.5, corresponding to a categorical rating of "good," while the mean revised Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) score was 19, corresponding to a categorical rating of "excellent." The RCT had a low risk of bias, while the prospective cohort studies exhibited serious risk of bias.
conclusionThere is a paucity of comparative literature evaluating ORIF and RTSA for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures, which is of variable methodological quality. In the absence of consistent, high-quality evidence, surgeons should consider patient-specific factors and technical experience when considering operative treatment options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40517357What 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.