ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Don't take their word for it: Investigating the diagnostic accuracy of history elements for anterior cruciate ligament tears.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The primary objective of this study was to investigate the association between patient-reported history elements and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the predictive validity of history elements and develop clinically interpretable decision rules to aid diagnostic reasoning. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of data collected during two prospective studies. Patient history elements including demographics, mechanism of injury, signs/symptoms at the time of injury, and subsequent symptoms since the injury were collected using a pre-existing departmental questionnaire and cross referenced with magnetic resonance imaging results. Association and predictive validity were investigated through penalised and unpenalised logistic regressions, and classification and regression tree analyses. Results: Of the 173 included participants, 87 participants (56 males) had an ACL tear with the remainder reported as having posterior cruciate ligament, meniscal, patellofemoral joint, medial and/or lateral knee injuries. There was a significant negative association between seeing deformity ( Conclusion: Patient-reported deformity and isolated anterior or medial knee pain at the time of injury were significantly associated with the absence of an ACL tear. Other history elements were not significantly associated with an ACL tear, highlighting the limited clinical utility of history taking and the importance of physical examination after knee injury. Level of Evidence: Level I.
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.