Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20172569›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of urology2010

How do you tell whether a change in surgical technique leads to a change in outcome?

Andrew J Vickers, Angel M Cronin, Timothy A Masterson, James A Eastham

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of urology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Impact of Replacing Fentanyl With Hydromorphone as the First-Line Postoperative Opioid Among Patients Undergoing Outpatient Cancer Surgery.Journal of perianesthesia nursing : official journal of the American Society of PeriAnesthesia Nurses · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Andrew J VickersDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Urology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10065, USA. vickersa@mskcc.org
Angel M Cronin
Timothy A Masterson
James A Eastham

Funding

SPORE In Prostate CancerP50CA092629 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Yu Chen, MICHAEL J MORRIS · 2001 to 2026
$63.0M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA092629NCI NIH HHS P50-CA92629
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSurgeons routinely evaluate and modify their surgical technique to improve patient outcome. It is also common for surgeons to analyze results before and after a change in technique to determine whether the change led to better results. Simple comparison of results before and after surgical modification may be confounded by the surgical learning curve. We developed a statistical method applicable to analyzing before/after surgical studies. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe used simulation studies to compare different statistical analyses of before/after studies. We evaluated a simple 2-group comparison of results before and after the modification by the chi-square test and a novel bootstrap method that adjusts for the surgical learning curve.

resultsIn the presence of the learning curve a simple 2-group comparison almost always showed an ineffective surgical modification to be of benefit. When the surgical modification was harmful, leading to a 10% decrease in the success rate, 2-group comparison nonetheless showed a statistically significant improvement in outcome about 80% of the time. The bootstrap method had only moderate power but did not show that ineffective surgical modifications were beneficial more than would be expected by chance.

conclusionsSimplistic approaches to the analysis of before/after surgical studies may lead to grossly erroneous results under the surgical learning curve. A straightforward alternative statistical method allows investigators to separate the effects of the learning curve from those of the surgical modification.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalHumansMaleProstatectomyResearch DesignTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID20172569
PMCPMC2859681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.