Notice: Users may be experiencing issues with displaying some pages on stanfordhealthcare.org. We are working closely with our technical teams to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience.
 

Learn about the flu shot, COVID-19 vaccine, and our masking policy »

Stanford Health Care

Research methodologic quality varies significantly by subspecialty: An analysis of AAOS meeting abstracts. Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma Souza, K. E., Chan, J. Y., Campbell, S. T., Bishop, J. A. 2021; 15: 37–41

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the level of evidence and study type of clinical abstracts accepted to the 2017 AAOS Annual Meeting based on subspecialty.Methods: All clinical abstracts presented at the 2017 AAOS Annual Meeting were assessed by two independent raters for LOE and study type. Nonparametric statistics and chi-square test were used to compare LOE and study types between subspecialties.Results: A total of 1083 abstracts met inclusion criteria. There was a significant difference in LOE of abstracts by subspecialty (p<0.001). Shoulder/elbow, adult reconstruction knee, hand/wrist, and sports had the highest percentage of level I and II studies. The type of study also varied significantly by subspecialty (p=0.005).Discussion: Methodologic quality of clinical studies presented at the 2017 AAOS Annual Meeting differed significantly among subspecialties. Orthopedic researchers should look to the fields producing the highest quality studies in an effort to improve methodological quality.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jcot.2020.11.001

View details for PubMedID 33717914