Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 501

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Size Matters: Defining Critical in Bone Defect Size!

Schemitsch, Emil H.·2017·Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

Abstract

Summary: Bone defects are common and are associated with a significant burden of disease. The treatment of these injuries remains controversial, particularly those defects which are critical sized. Despite the need for decision making to be evidence based, a lack of consensus around definitions of critical-sized defects still exists, particularly around those defects in the 1–3 cm range. There is a need to define “critical” in bone defect size because noncritical defects may heal without planned reconstruction and secondary surgery. This article reviews the current evidence around the definition of a critical-sized bone defect and concludes that defects in the order of 2.5 cm or greater seem to have a poor natural history.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/bot.0000000000000978

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 501

Metadata

Authors
Schemitsch, E. H.
Venue
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Published
2017-10
Volume
31
Issue
5
Pages
S20-S22
ISSN
0890-5339 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2759529239
Cited by
501
References
0
FWCI
13.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
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: Size Matters: Defining Critical in Bone Defect Size! https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/bot.0000000000000978
The paper
Schemitsch, E. H. (2017). Size Matters: Defining Critical in Bone Defect Size! Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. https://doi.org/10.1097/bot.0000000000000978

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.