ArticleOTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma2025
State of orthopaedic trauma registries in South Korea, Japan, and Australia.
Article in OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The scope and complexity of orthopaedic trauma registries differ across the Asia-Pacific region. The purpose of this report was to review the existing registries in South Korea, Japan, and Australia focusing on their current utility, processes, and future directions. Methods: Representatives of the International Orthopaedic Trauma Associations and relevant national registry experts provided a comprehensive overview of their countries' orthopaedic trauma registries based on predetermined mandatory aspects of their systems consistent with the goals of the global review, which includes other regions in a review series. Results: Japan and Australia have dedicated orthopaedic trauma registries without comprehensive data collection from the entire countries. The Database of Orthopaedic Trauma Japan and the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes Registry in Australia collect data specific to the skeletal injury, treatment options utilized, and outcomes. South Korea mandates by legislation the collection of comprehensive data on trauma patients through the Korea Trauma Data Bank in conjunction with the National Emergency Department Information System and Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. These registries are not specific to orthopaedic trauma, but some skeletal injury-specific outcomes are possible to extract from the large data sets. Conclusion: South Korea, Japan, and Australia collect and compile orthopaedic trauma data through different systems, but these reflect a similar dedication to the improvement of trauma care and outcomes. All 3 countries have the potential resources to develop comprehensive orthopaedic trauma registries to monitor epidemiology and outcomes of skeletal injuries in conjunction with their national major trauma registries.
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.