Gap finder

Search review questions

Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.

Population

Intervention or exposure

Comparison

Outcome

Any field or review title

Field or topic

Source

Review versions

775 questions in 58 reviews · Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma

current versions

No studies 166 · 21.4%Ungraded 24 · 3.1%Very low 356 · 45.9%Low 162 · 20.9%Moderate 47 · 6.1%High 20 · 2.6%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Question	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) vs hemiarthroplasty Self‐reported shoulder function: QuickDASH (0 to 55: worst disability); % of normal shoulder function based on WOOS score (higher = better outcome) · adults undergoing surgery for displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (2 trials) Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 61 participants	Very low
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) vs hemiarthroplasty Quality of life: EQ‐5D (0: dead to 1: best quality of life) · adults undergoing surgery for displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (2 trials) Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 83 participants	Very low
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) vs hemiarthroplasty Mortality · adults undergoing surgery for displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (2 trials) Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	2 studies · 161 participants	Very low
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) vs hemiarthroplasty Adverse events: number of participants with complications · adults undergoing surgery for displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (2 trials) Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 0.36 [0.14, 0.94]	2 studies · 160 participants	Very low
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) vs hemiarthroplasty Additional surgery (reoperation or secondary surgery) · adults undergoing surgery for displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (2 trials) Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	2 studies · 161 participants	Very low
Early vs delayed mobilisation Self‐reported shoulder function: Croft Shoulder Disability Score (1 or more problems) · adults with minimally displaced or displaced (2‐part or 3‐part) proximal humeral fractures treated non‐surgically (5… Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 0.73 [0.46, 1.15]	1 study · 74 participants	Very low
Early vs delayed mobilisation Quality of life: EQ‐5D (0: dead to 1: best quality of life) · adults with minimally displaced or displaced (2‐part or 3‐part) proximal humeral fractures treated non‐surgically (5… Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 39 participants	Very low
Early vs delayed mobilisation Mortality · adults with minimally displaced or displaced (2‐part or 3‐part) proximal humeral fractures treated non‐surgically (5… Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	2 studies · 92 participants	Very low
Early vs delayed mobilisation Adverse events: shoulder complications · adults with minimally displaced or displaced (2‐part or 3‐part) proximal humeral fractures treated non‐surgically (5… Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	4 studies · 259 participants	Very low
Early vs delayed mobilisation Additional surgery or substantive treatment · adults with minimally displaced or displaced (2‐part or 3‐part) proximal humeral fractures treated non‐surgically (5… Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	4 studies · 259 participants	Very low
Surgical vs non‐surgical treatment Functional scoresb(higher = better outcome) · (mainly older) adults with most types of displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (10 trials) Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.1	7 studies · 552 participants	High
Surgical vs non‐surgical treatment Functional scoresd(higher = better outcome) · (mainly older) adults with most types of displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (10 trials) Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.17	3 studies · 347 participants	Moderate
Intervention NR Mobilityd ‐ overall analysis Using different mobility scales: MILA (range 0 to 36), EMS (range 0 to 20), BBS (range 0 to 56), PPME (range 0 to 12), Koval (range 1 to 7). Higher values indicate better mobility (except MILA and Koval, where scale wa... · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.53 [0.1, 0.96]	7 studies · 507 participants	Low
Intervention NR Mobility scales, using EMS (range 0 to 20). Higher values indicate better mobility · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	MD 1	1 study · 44 participants	Low
Intervention NR TUG (lower score = faster) · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 74 participants	Low
Intervention NR Mobilityd ‐ overall analysis Using different mobility scales: mPPT (range 0 to 36), POMA (range 0 to 30), SPPB (range 0 to 12), PPME (range 0 to 12). A higher score indicates better mobility. · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.32 [0.11, 0.54]	7 studies · 761 participants	High
Intervention NR Walking speedg ‐ overall analysis Measured using metres/second (m/s) and metres/minute (m/min). A higher score indicates faster walking. · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.16 [0.04, 0.29]	14 studies · 1067 participants	High
Intervention NR Functioningi ‐ overall analysis Using different functioning scales: FSQ (range 0 to 36), BI (range 0 to 100), AM‐PAC daily activity (range 9 to 101), COPM (range 0 to 20), LEFS (range 0 to 80), NEADL (range 0 to 66). A higher score indicates bette... · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.23 [0.1, 0.36]	9 studies · 936 participants	High
Intervention NR HRQoL using EQ‐ 5D (range 0 to 1), SF‐36 (range 0 to 100), SF‐12 (range 0 to 100), and WHOQOL‐BREF (range 0 to 130). A higher score indicates better quality of life. · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.14 [0, 0.29]	10 studies · 785 participants	Moderate
Intervention NR Mortality · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 1.01 [0.49, 2.06]	8 studies · 737 participants	Moderate
Intervention NR Adverse event: number of people who were re‐admitted · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 0.86 [0.52, 1.42]	2 studies · 206 participants	Low
Intervention NR Mobility outcome · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Intervention NR Mobility scales, using different scales: SPPB (range 0 to 12), PPME (range 0 to 12). A higher score indicates better mobility. · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.2 [0.05, 0.36]	5 studies · 621 participants	High
Intervention NR Walking speedg ‐ overall analysis Measured using metres/second (m/s) and metres/minute (m/min). A higher score indicates faster walking. · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.16	6 studies · 360 participants	Moderate
Intervention NR TUG (lower score = faster) · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 128 participants	Very low
Intervention NR Minute Walk Test · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	0 participants	Ungraded
Intervention NR Mobility scales · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	0 participants	Ungraded
Intervention NR TUG · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 96 participants	Low
Intervention NR 6MWT · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	MD 55.65 [28.58, 82.72]	3 studies · 198 participants	Low
Intervention NR All · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	0 participants	Ungraded
Intervention NR Mobility scales, using different mobility scales: mPPT (range 0 to 36), POMA (range 0 to 30). · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.94 [0.53, 1.34]	2 studies · 104 participants	Moderate
Intervention NR Functioningi ‐ overall analysis Using different scales: mBI (range 0 to 20), BI (range 0 to 100), FIM (range 18 to 126), NEADL (range 0 to 66). A higher score indicates better functioning. · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.75 [0.24, 1.26]	7 studies · 379 participants	Very low
Intervention NR HRQoL Using EQ‐5D (range 0 to 1) and HOOS (range 0 to 100). A higher score indicates better quality of life. · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.39	4 studies · 314 participants	Very low
Intervention NR Mortality · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 1.06 [0.48, 2.3]	6 studies · 489 participants	Low
Intervention NR Adverse event: number of people who were re‐admitted · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 0.7 [0.44, 1.11]	4 studies · 322 participants	Low
Intervention NR Number of people who returned to living at pre‐fracture residence · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 1.07 [0.73, 1.56]	2 studies · 240 participants	Low
Intervention NR Mobility outcome · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Intervention NR Mobility scales, using different mobility scales: MILA (range 0 to 36), EMS (range 0 to 20), BBS (range 0 to 56), PPME (range 0 to 12), Koval (range 1 to 7). Higher values indicate better mobility (except MILA and Koval, where scale was inverted f... · adults following hip fracture surgery Interventions for improving mobility after hip fracture surgery in adults (2022) · Cochrane	SMD 0.57 [0.07, 1.06]	6 studies · 463 participants	Moderate
Retrograde intramedullary nail (RIMN) vs locking plate PROMs (short term) Measurements: DRI (range 0–100, where lower values indicate less disability) · adults with fractures of the distal femur Interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 12 participants	Very low
Retrograde intramedullary nail (RIMN) vs locking plate PROMs (long term) Measurements: SMFA (range 0–100, higher values indicate worse function) KSS (range 0–100, where higher values indicate better function) · adults with fractures of the distal femur Interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	2 studies · 198 participants	Low
Retrograde intramedullary nail (RIMN) vs locking plate Direct adverse events (reoperation): we report reoperation for removal of implant as this is the most clinically relevant. Other adverse events with data included: loss of fixation, superficial infection, deep infection, haematoma formation, impla... · adults with fractures of the distal femur Interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 1.48 [0.55, 4]	1 study · 114 participants	Very low
Retrograde intramedullary nail (RIMN) vs locking plate QoL (short term): using EQ‐5D (range 0–1, where higher values indicate higher QoL) · adults with fractures of the distal femur Interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 14 participants	Very low
Retrograde intramedullary nail (RIMN) vs locking plate QoL (long term): using EQ‐5D (range 0–1, where higher values indicate higher QoL) · adults with fractures of the distal femur Interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 156 participants	Very low
Retrograde intramedullary nail (RIMN) vs locking plate Pain · adults with fractures of the distal femur Interventions for treating fractures of the distal femur in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Neutral / cushioned vs minimalist running shoes Number of runners sustaining a lower‐limb running injurya ( · healthy adults participating in recreational running Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 0.77 [0.59, 1.01]	5 studies · 766 participants	Low
Motion control vs neutral / cushioned running shoes Runner satisfaction with footwear · healthy adults participating in recreational running Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Motion control vs neutral / cushioned running shoes Adverse events (e.g. skin complaints) other than musculoskeletal injuries · healthy adults participating in recreational running Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Motion control vs neutral / cushioned running shoes Number of runners requiring hospital admission or surgery, or both, for musculoskeletal injury or adverse event · healthy adults participating in recreational running Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Soft vs hard running shoes Number of runners sustaining a lower‐limb running injurya ( · healthy adults participating in recreational running Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults (2022) · Cochrane	RR 0.82	2 studies · 1095 participants	Low
Soft vs hard running shoes Number of lower‐limb running injuries · healthy adults participating in recreational running Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults (2022) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies