Assessment of fracture repair
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, ISSN: 1531-2291, Vol: 29, Issue: Supplement 12, Page: S57-S61
2015
- 22Citations
- 2Usage
- 61Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations22
- Citation Indexes22
- 22
- CrossRef17
- Usage2
- Abstract Views2
- Captures61
- Readers61
- 61
Article Description
Assessment of fracture union is a critical concept in clinical orthopaedics; however, there is no established "gold standard" for fracture healing. This review provides an overview of the problems related to the assessment of fracture healing, examines currently available tools to determine union, discusses the role of functional outcomes in the assessment of fracture healing, and finally evaluates healing outcome measures as they pertain to fracture trials. Because there is no universally accepted method to determine fracture healing, orthopaedic surgeons must rely on a range of tools that can include: radiographic assessment, mechanical assessment, serologic markers, and clinical evaluation (including functional outcomes). When used in conjunction, these tools can help to improve the sensitivity and specificity of determining fracture union. This is furthermore relevant when conducting fracture healing trials, for which there is little consensus between surgeons or the Food and Drug Administration as to optimal study endpoints. Such studies should therefore include a composite outcome measure consisting of radiographic and functional assessments to increase the quality and consistency of fracture healing trials.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84948660688&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/bot.0000000000000470; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26584269; http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00005131-201512001-00013; https://journals.lww.com/00005131-201512001-00013; https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/boneandjointpub/1067; https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2066&context=boneandjointpub; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/bot.0000000000000470; https://journals.lww.com/jorthotrauma/Fulltext/2015/12001/Assessment_of_Fracture_Repair.13.aspx
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know