Talk:Humerus fracture
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Humerus fracture article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Humerus fracture.
|
 | The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
Untitled
[edit]"the manky forearm" What's this supposed to mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.110.4.177 (talk) 16:30, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Ischemic contraction ?
[edit]Could we get more info in this article on Humerus fracture causing complications such as distal Ischemic contraction? 209.59.74.17 (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Prevalence of Humerus Fractures
[edit]The current article claims they account for about 4% of fractures. I think this is probably not an accurate number. I suspect the real number is probably about twice as much (~9%).
The claim in the current article is based on a source that says “Humerus fractures account for 4 to 6 percent of all fractures in young patients and 1 to 3 percent of all fractures in elderly patients” (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482281/) which in turn cites a paper based on a web-based survey of the Dutch Orthopaedic Society (DOS) and the European Musculoskeletal Oncology Society (EMSOS) that I don’t have access to (https://boneandjoint.org.uk/article/10.1302/0301-620X.100B10.BJJ-2018-0239.R1), except that the abstract says it had a ~10% response rate. Note that most fractures are in the elderly, so I’m not sure it makes sense to average those two ranges into 4% in any case.
On the other hand, I stumbled on a paper (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7751975/) whose statistics seem to be more reliable since they seem to based on a uniformly gathered data: the Swedish Fracture Register. That article claims that proximal humerus fractures account for ~8% of fractures, and distal humerus fractures accounting for ~1%.
But I’m not really knowledgeable enough to analyze whether the Swedish registry has any additional confounding that makes the Dutch survey more reliable Pabnau (talk) 19:10, 24 April 2026 (UTC)