Scientific advisory
Scientific Advisory & Evidence Review in Munich
Scientific advisory helps research teams and organizations assess a specific orthopedic or sports-medicine evidence question. PD Dr. med. Daniel P. Berthold reviews the relevance of studies, clinical outcomes and conclusions. The assessment includes contradictory findings, uncertainty and the limits of applying results to another population or setting.
At a glance
Advisory at a glance
- Define the research question and target population
- Evaluate relevance and methodological limitations
- Discuss clinically meaningful outcomes
- Document conclusions, uncertainty and further evidence needs
Research questions
Specify the decision a study should inform.
A broad question such as whether a technique is better needs a defined population, intervention or diagnostic method, comparator, outcome and follow-up period. Without these elements, even a large collection of studies may not answer the question that matters to the project.
An assignment can address an early proposal, an existing protocol or the interpretation of completed work. Specialist discussion of clinical outcomes is distinct from statistical sample-size planning, ethics review or taking responsibility as a study investigator. The required roles are agreed explicitly.
Evidence appraisal
A reasoned synthesis, not a list of favorable findings.
An agreed evidence review can compare populations, study methods, outcomes, findings and important limitations. Conflicting results and missing information are retained. The conclusions distinguish what a study demonstrated in its own setting from what can reasonably be applied to the intended clinical use.
Search scope, dates and selection methods should be recorded. A targeted literature summary is not described as a systematic review unless the corresponding methodological requirements are met. A more extensive systematic project requires an appropriately defined scope and team.
Scientific communication
Keep conclusions within the limits of the data.
A specialist review of a manuscript, presentation or report can assess whether the conclusion follows from the results. Relevant distinctions include association versus causation, statistical versus clinical importance, and exploratory versus pre-specified analyses.
Authorship, contributions, conflicts of interest and publication plans are discussed before work begins. Ethics approval, data protection, sponsor obligations and statistical responsibilities remain with the appropriately qualified people and institutions. Neither a favorable result nor publication is guaranteed.
Medical and academic background
Orthopedics, sports medicine and research.
PD Dr. med. Daniel P. Berthold is a specialist in orthopedic and trauma surgery and a Privatdozent at the Technical University of Munich. His clinical and research interests include shoulder and knee conditions, biomechanics, sports injuries and rehabilitation. This is the specialist background for his advisory work; it is not a claim to cover every medical discipline.
The publication record can be checked through PubMed and ORCID. LMU University Hospital documents the 2023 AGA Research Award for a biomechanical shoulder study. Publications and academic distinctions provide evidence of research experience, not proof that an unrelated product is effective or approved.
Working together
From the project brief to a written recommendation.
First, describe the organization, the medical question and the decision you need to make. A short, non-confidential outline is sufficient to assess the specialist fit. This initial inquiry does not establish an advisory agreement or transfer clinical responsibility.
Before work begins, the scope, deliverables, timeline, fee, confidentiality arrangements and any conflicts of interest are agreed. Depending on the assignment, the output may be an annotated concept, an evidence summary, a workshop record or a written recommendation with priorities and unresolved questions.
The findings are discussed with the responsible team. Any follow-up review is tied to a defined milestone, such as a revised concept or additional study results. An unfavorable assessment or a recommendation not to proceed must remain possible. Use of the physician’s name, quotations or portrait requires a separate agreement.
Contact and fees
Discuss your project in Munich or by video call.
For an advisory inquiry, email info@ortho-center.eu with your organization, country, topic, target users, requested output and deadline. Please state your preferred working language. International assignments are assessed individually; the language of this website does not imply a local office or authorization to provide patient care in your country.
Fees depend on the documents to be reviewed, the agreed output and the required time. A project-specific scope and fee are agreed before the assignment begins; there is no standard package price. Confidential project documents and identifiable health data should only be shared after agreeing a suitable transfer route.
For your own symptoms or a treatment recommendation, use the clinical appointment or second-opinion route instead. Corporate advisory is not a substitute for an individual examination. Editorial interviews and lectures are handled separately from product or organizational advice.
Common questions
Answers to common questions.
How does scientific advisory differ from medical advisory?
Scientific advisory focuses on research questions, evidence, methods and conclusions. Medical advisory focuses more on clinical concepts and their application. A clearly defined project can include both perspectives.
Can an existing study proposal be reviewed?
Yes. Describe the question, population, comparison and intended outcomes so that a specialist review can be scoped. Additional methodological expertise may be needed depending on the study.
Is every literature review a systematic review?
No. The methods and scope must support that description. A targeted evidence summary is labeled as such; a systematic review requires a separately agreed methodological approach.
Are statistics and ethics approval included?
Not automatically. Specialist advisory does not assume statistical, ethics-committee, sponsor or investigator responsibilities. These roles must be assigned explicitly.
Is publication or a positive result guaranteed?
No. Scientific assessment is open-ended. Negative findings, conflicting evidence and methodological weaknesses must be included, and editorial publication decisions remain independent.
Next step
Discuss an advisory project
Include the organization, medical question, intended audience, format and timeline so the scope can be assessed clearly.
