Evidence Hub

Validation of a prospective cohort study of older adults with hip fractures

D. Metcalfe, Matthew L. Costa, N. Parsons, J. Achten, James P. M. Masters, M. Png, S. E. Lamb, X. Griffin

The Bone & Joint Journal, 2019

28 citations

Abstract

AIMS

This study sought to determine the proportion of older adults with hip fractures captured by a multicentre prospective cohort, the World Hip Trauma Evaluation (WHiTE), whether there was evidence of selection bias during WHiTE recruitment, and the extent to which the WHiTE cohort is representative of the broader population of older adults with hip fractures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The characteristics of patients recruited into the WHiTE cohort study were compared with those treated at WHiTE hospitals during the same timeframe and submitted to the National Hip Fracture Database (NHFD).

RESULTS

Patients recruited to WHiTE were more likely to be admitted from their own home (83.5% vs 80.2%; p < 0.001) and to have a higher median Abbreviated Mental Test Score (AMTS) (9 (interquartile range (IQR) 6 to 10) vs 9 (IQR 5 to 10); p < 0.001) than those who were not recruited. In terms of WHiTE cohort generalizability, participating hospitals included a greater proportion of Major Trauma Centres (47.8% vs 7.8%) and large hospitals (997 (IQR 873 to 1290) vs 707 (459 to 903) beds) with high-volume Emergency Departments (median annual attendances of 43 981 (IQR 37 147 to 54 385) vs 35 964 (IQR 26 229 to 50 551)). However, there were few differences in baseline characteristics between patients in the WHiTE cohort and those recorded in the NHFD.

CONCLUSION

There is evidence of a weak selection bias towards recruiting fitter patients within the WHiTE cohort, which will help to put into…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free