The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Surgical interventions for treating distal radial fractures in adults
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fracture of the distal radius is a common clinical problem, particularly in older white women with osteoporosis. OBJECTIVES: To determine when, and if so what type of, surgical intervention is the most appropriate treatment for fractures of the distal radius in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register (November 2002), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2003), EMBASE (1988 to 2003 Week 8), CINAHL (1982 to February 2003), the National Research Register (Issue 1, 2003), PEDro, conference proceedings and reference lists of articles. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials involving skeletally mature patients with a fracture of the distal radius, which compared surgical treatment with conservative treatment, different types of surgical intervention or the duration of immobilisation after surgery. The main categories of surgical intervention were external fixation, percutaneous pinning, open reduction and internal fixation, and the insertion of bone scaffolding materials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All trials, meeting the selection criteria, were independently assessed by both reviewers for methodological quality. Data were extracted for anatomical, functional and clinical outcomes (including complications). The trials were grouped into categories relating to the main comparisons and types of surgical intervention. Despite clear heterogeneity in the characteristics of comparable trials, pooling of data was undertaken where possible and appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: Forty eight trials, examining 25 treatment comparisons, met the inclusion criteria of this review. These involved a total of 4371 mainly female and older patients with generally displaced, often comminuted and potentially or evidently unstable fractures. Nearly half of the trials compared surgery with plaster cast immobilisation. Summarising the outcomes was hampered by the variation between the studies in participant characteristics, interventions, quality of trial methodology and reporting, and outcome measurement. Surgical methods were usually associated with better anatomical appearance after fracture healing, but there was inadequate evidence to confirm that these had resulted in better functional and clinical outcomes for the patients. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The 48 randomised trials do not provide robust evidence for most of the decisions necessary in the management of these fractures. Although, in particular, there is some evidence to support the use of external fixation or percutaneous pinning, their precise role and methods are not established. It is also unclear whether surgical intervention of most fracture types will produce consistently better long-term outcomes. There is a need for good quality evidence for the surgical management of these fractures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)04337-3 · Cited by 5,373
Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials: The CONSORT Statement
Begg, C. (1996) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03540080059030 · Cited by 3,127
Cited by
Margaliot, Z., Haase, S. C., Kotsis, S. V., Kim, H. M., & Chung, K. C. (2005) · The Journal of Hand Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2005.08.009 · Cited by 260
Metadata
- Authors
- Handoll, H. H., & Madhok, R.
- Venue
- The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
- Published
- 2003-07-21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- CD003209-CD003209
- OpenAlex
- W1907328253
- Cited by
- 240
- References
- 2
- Type
- reference entry
- Language
- en
- Status
- Retracted
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Surgical interventions for treating distal radial fractures in adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd003209
- The paper
- Handoll, H. H., & Madhok, R. (2003). Surgical interventions for treating distal radial fractures in adults. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd003209
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.