ReviewCureus2026
Disability: The Understudied Population in Orthopaedics.
Review in Cureus, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Healthcare disparities profoundly affect healthcare delivery. Patients with disabilities remain under-recognized as a population warranting focused public health attention. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify and characterize published literature addressing access to or outcomes of orthopaedic care among people with disabilities. This study received IRB exemption. Articles published within the past five years in the top 20 highest impact factor (IF), Medline-indexed American orthopaedic surgery journals were identified through PubMed. Studies assessing access to or outcomes of orthopaedic care among underserved populations were included. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full-text articles and extracted data, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. A total of 124 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 61 (49.2%) only examined disparities in access, 36 (29.0%) examined disparities in outcomes, and 27 (21.8%) examined disparities in both access and outcomes. Commonly evaluated disparity-related factors were race (53.2% of outcomes studies and 32.6% of access studies), insurance/payor status (29.0% outcomes and 39.3% access), socioeconomic factors (45.2% outcomes and 28.1% access), ethnicity (33.9% outcomes and 19.1% access), and presence of chronic illnesses (35.5% outcomes and 30.3% access). Barriers to orthopaedic care access or orthopaedic outcomes related to disability were examined less often than those related to other underserved populations, in only 6 (5.0%) of all studies. There remains a critical gap in the orthopaedic literature regarding access to care and outcome disparities among patients with disabilities. Future research should systematically evaluate barriers faced by this population and incorporate inclusive design principles to promote equitable orthopaedic care.
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.