A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing conservative and surgical treatments for acute patellar dislocation in children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose This study sought to clarify treatment evidence to treat patellar dislocation by evaluating which treatment could yield better improvement of clinical outcomes for acute patellar dislocation in children and adolescents 18 years of age or younger. Materials and methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases were searched for relevant articles comparing clinical outcomes of conservative and surgical treatments for acute patellar dislocation in children and adolescents published from March 2008 to August 2022. Data searching, extraction, analysis, and quality assessment were performed on the basis of the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. The quality assessment of each study was investigated using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) critical appraisal scoring system and Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale scores. To calculate the overall combined effect size for each outcome, Review Manager Version 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Software Update, Oxford) was employed. Results Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one prospective study were investigated. In terms of pain [mean difference (MD) 6.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.73–11.45, I2 0%], there were significantly better outcomes in conservative group. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences in any evaluated outcomes such as redislocation [risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% CI 0.72–2.54, I2 65%], Kujala score (MD 3.92, 95% CI −0.17 to 8.01, I2 0%), Tegner score (MD 1.04, 95% CI −0.04 to 2.11, I2 71%), or subjective results (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.74–1.34, I2 33%) between conservative and surgical treatment groups. Conclusions Despite better pain outcomes with conservative group, the present study revealed no significant differences in clinical outcomes between conservative treatment and surgical treatment in children and adolescents with acute patellar dislocation. Since there are no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two groups, routine surgical treatment is not advocated for treating acute patellar dislocation in children and adolescents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.025 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".