ReviewOTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma2025
Orthopaedic registry history and future in South Africa.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data is power. In 2017, the South African Orthopaedic Association (SAOA) presidential line identified a political and market-influenced initiative to collect and use data in the health care space. The South African government had funded a "Health Market Inquiry" (HMI), which determined that medical professionals were poorly monitored and lacked peer review. Clinicians were not involved in this effort and were not well positioned to represent the interests of patients. The report noted that funders and hospital groups favored patient-reported outcome measurements (PROs) but proposed to collect and interpret the data themselves. Clinical data was, therefore, being collected and interpreted by nonclinicians. It became evident that it was in the interest of the SAOA to control this data securely with orthopaedic peer interpretation of the data. At the time of the HMI report, 2 databases were in use in South Africa: a National Joint Registry had been created in 2012 (limited to arthroplasty) and the REDCap database had been adopted by many academic units and was used mainly for research. Other than these registries, medical data was individually stored and opaque. This report summarizes the efforts of the SAOA to collect meaningful PROs and provide clinically relevant data analysis to inform health care policy and clinical quality improvement.
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.