ArticleWorld journal of surgery2006
Surgical outcomes research based on administrative data: inferior or complementary to prospective randomized clinical trials?
Article in World journal of surgery, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Incidence of periprosthetic joint infection after primary total hip arthroplasty is underestimated: a synthesis of meta-analysis and bibliometric analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- Trends in emergent diverticular disease management: a nationwide cohort study from 2009 to 2018.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- Big Data vs. Clinical Trials in HPB Surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Review
- Healthcare Disparities in Outcomes of a Metropolitan Congenital Heart Surgery Center: The Effect of Clinical and Socioeconomic Factors.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2018Article
- Comparison of Long-term Outcomes in Patients with Premature Triple-vessel Coronary Disease Undergoing Three Different Treatment Strategies: A Prospective Cohort Study.Chinese medical journal · 2018Article
- Current trends in racial, ethnic, and healthcare disparities associated with pediatric cardiac surgery outcomes.Congenital heart disease · 2017Article
- How to review a surgical paper: a guide for junior referees.BMC medicine · 2016Article
- Risk factors for venous thromboembolism after hysterectomy.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2015Article
- Use and accuracy of diagnostic imaging in the evaluation of pediatric appendicitis.Journal of pediatric surgery · 2015Article
- Secondary data analysis of large data sets in urology: successes and errors to avoid.The Journal of urology · 2014Review
- Tissue banking in a regional hospital: a promising future concept? First report on fresh frozen tissue banking in a hospital without an integrated institute of pathology.World journal of surgery · 2012Article
- A review for clinical outcomes research: hypothesis generation, data strategy, and hypothesis-driven statistical analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2011Article
- Population-based trend analysis of laparoscopic Nissen and Toupet fundoplications for gastroesophageal reflux disease.Surgical endoscopy · 2010Article
- Critical appraisal of meta-analyses: an introductory guide for the practicing surgeon.Patient safety in surgery · 2009Article
- Low rate of infected knee replacements in a nationwide series--is it an underestimate?Acta orthopaedica · 2009Article
- Disagreement in primary study selection between systematic reviews on negative pressure wound therapy.BMC medical research methodology · 2008Article
- [Outcomes research: definitions, methods and challenges in trauma and orthopaedic surgery].Der Unfallchirurg · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The importance of surgical research has gained new prominence over the past decades as the relevance of well designed and well conducted studies has become increasingly evident. There are two basic but diametrically different methods of conducting research: the prospective randomized clinical trial and the retrospective surgical outcomes study based on administrative data. Administrative databases contain data that were initially collected for purposes other than scientific research. Whereas the prospective randomized clinical trial is familiar to most surgeons, surgical outcomes research based on administrative data constitutes a genre of investigation that is often unfamiliar to and even disparaged by the surgical community. In the present article, the strengths and weaknesses of both prospective randomized clinical trials and retrospective surgical outcomes research are discussed. Specifically, the advantages and limitations of investigations based on large administrative databases are outlined. Because both study designs play an important role in surgical research, carefully designed and implemented surgical outcomes research based on administrative data should be viewed as being complementary and not inferior to prospective randomized clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16485067What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.