Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 202

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the diagnosis of hip femoroacetabular impingement/labral tear: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Reiman, M P, Goode, A P, Cook, C E, Hölmich, P, Thorborg, K·2015·British Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

Background: Surgery for hip femoroacetabular impingement/acetabular labral tear (FAI/ALT) is exponentially increasing despite lacking investigation of the accuracy of various diagnostic measures. Useful clinical utility of these measures is necessary to support diagnostic imaging and subsequent surgical decision-making. Objective: Summarise/evaluate the current diagnostic accuracy of various clinical tests germane to hip FAI/ALT pathology. Methods: A computer-assisted literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE databases using keywords related to diagnostic accuracy of the hip joint, as well as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA) guidelines were used for the search and reporting phases of the study. Quality assessment of bias and applicability was conducted using the Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2). Random effects models were used to summarise sensitivities (SN), specificities (SP), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and respective confidence intervals (CI). Results: The employed search strategy revealed 21 potential articles, with one demonstrating high quality. Nine articles qualified for meta-analysis. The meta-analysis demonstrated that flexion-adduction-internal rotation (pooled SN ranging from 0.94 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.97) to 0.99 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.00); DOR 5.71 (95% CI 0.84 to 38.86) to 7.82 (95% CI 1.06 to 57.84)) and flexion-internal rotation (pooled SN 0.96 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.99); DOR 8.36 (95% CI 0.41 to 171.3) tests possess only screening accuracy. Conclusions: Few hip physical examination tests for diagnosing FAI/ALT have been investigated in enough studies of substantial quality to direct clinical decision-making. Further high-quality studies across a wider spectrum of hip pathology patients are recommended to discern the confirmed clinical utility of these tests. Trials registration number: PROSPERO Registration # CRD42014010144.

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 · 10.1136/bjsports-2014-094302

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 202

Metadata

Authors
Reiman, M. P., Goode, A. P., Cook, C. E., Hölmich, P., & Thorborg, K.
Venue
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2014-12-16
Volume
49
Issue
12
Pages
811-811
ISSN
  • 0306-3674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-0480
OpenAlex
W2162530322
Cited by
202
References
6
FWCI
3.21
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: Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the diagnosis of hip femoroacetabular impingement/labral tear: a systematic review with meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bjsports-2014-094302
The paper
Reiman, M. P., Goode, A. P., Cook, C. E., Hölmich, P., & Thorborg, K. (2015). Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for the diagnosis of hip femoroacetabular impingement/labral tear: a systematic review with meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2014-094302

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.