ReviewOTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma2025
European orthopaedic trauma registries: perspectives from Belgium, Greece, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom.
Review 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To provide an overview of the current status and future directions of trauma registries across Europe, with specific examples from a range of countries. Methods: Member countries of the International Orthopaedic Trauma Association were contacted to provide information on the development, current position, and future plans for trauma registries within their countries. Responses were received from 6 countries-Belgium, Greece, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom-providing an overview of practice across Europe. Results: The background, evolution, and current status of trauma registries varies widely across Europe from highly mature systems to those in the early stages of development. Funding process, data management, and governance also differ between countries. Conclusions: The trauma registries of Germany and the United Kingdom are the most mature and have provided the greatest output for research to date. However, the development of registries in other European countries will allow an increase in comparative data which can be used to drive standards for trauma care. Countries with more evolved registries can provide useful insights to those in development to assist in set-up and improve collaboration.
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.