Skip to main content

Table 2 MINORS appraisal scores for the included retrospective studies

From: Meta-analysis of locking plate versus intramedullary nail for treatment of proximal humeral fractures

Study

Methodologic itemsa

Total

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Von et al. 2014

2

1

0

2

0

2

2

0

1

2

2

2

16

Lekic et al. 2012

2

2

0

2

0

2

1

0

1

0

2

2

14

Konrad et al. 2012

2

2

2

2

0

2

1

0

1

2

2

2

18

Trepat et al. 2011

2

2

0

2

0

2

1

0

1

2

2

2

16

Matziolis et al. 2010

2

2

0

2

0

2

2

0

1

2

2

2

17

Gradl et al. 2009

2

2

2

2

0

2

1

0

1

2

2

2

18

  1. aMethodologic items are as follows: (1) a clearly stated aim; (2) inclusion of consecutive patients; (3) prospective collection of data; (4) endpoints appropriate to the aim of the study; (5) unbiased assessment of the study endpoint; (6) follow-up period appropriate to the aim of the study; (7) loss to follow-up, which is less than 5 %; (8) prospective calculation of the study size; (9) an adequate control group; (10) contemporary groups; (11) baseline equivalence of groups; and (12) adequate statistical analyses. The items are scored as “0” (not reported), “1” (reported but inadequate) or “2” (reported and adequate). The global ideal score for comparative studies is 24 [18]
Back to article page

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

ISSN: 1749-799X