Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 6, Issue 3 | Pages 246 - 253
3 Mar 2025
Smith G Teng WH Riley ND Little C Sellon E Thurley N Dias J Dean BJF

Aims. To evaluate the diagnostic characteristics and reliability of radiological methods used to assess scaphoid fracture union through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to June 2022. Any study reporting data on the diagnostic characteristics and/or the reliability of radiological methods assessing scaphoid union was included. Data were extracted and checked for accuracy and completeness by pairs of reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Results. A total of 13 studies were included, which were three assessed radiographs alone, six CT alone, and four radiographs + CT. Diagnostic sensitivity was assessed by CT in three studies (0.78, 0.78, and 0.73) and by radiographs in two studies (0.65, 0.75). Diagnostic specificity was assessed by CT in three studies (0.96, 0.8, 0.4) and by radiographs in two studies (0.67, 0.4). Interobserver reliability was assessed for radiographs by seven studies (two fair, four moderate, and one substantial) and for CT in nine studies (one fair, one moderate, six substantial, and one almost perfect). Conclusion. There is evidence to support both the use of CT and radiographs in assessing scaphoid fracture union. Although CT appears superior in terms of both its diagnostic characteristics and reliability, further research is necessary to better define the optimal clinical pathways for patients. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2025;6(3):246–253


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 11, Issue 11 | Pages 814 - 825
14 Nov 2022
Ponkilainen V Kuitunen I Liukkonen R Vaajala M Reito A Uimonen M

Aims

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to gather epidemiological information on selected musculoskeletal injuries and to provide pooled injury-specific incidence rates.

Methods

PubMed (National Library of Medicine) and Scopus (Elsevier) databases were searched. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they reported incidence rate (or count with population at risk), contained data on adult population, and were written in English language. The number of cases and population at risk were collected, and the pooled incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using either a fixed or random effects model.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 1 | Pages 9 - 19
16 Jan 2024
Dijkstra H van de Kuit A de Groot TM Canta O Groot OQ Oosterhoff JH Doornberg JN

Aims

Machine-learning (ML) prediction models in orthopaedic trauma hold great promise in assisting clinicians in various tasks, such as personalized risk stratification. However, an overview of current applications and critical appraisal to peer-reviewed guidelines is lacking. The objectives of this study are to 1) provide an overview of current ML prediction models in orthopaedic trauma; 2) evaluate the completeness of reporting following the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement; and 3) assess the risk of bias following the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) tool.

Methods

A systematic search screening 3,252 studies identified 45 ML-based prediction models in orthopaedic trauma up to January 2023. The TRIPOD statement assessed transparent reporting and the PROBAST tool the risk of bias.