ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2010
The focus of Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery in the 21st century.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgical evaluation and knowledge transfer--methods of clinical research in surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2012Review
- Scientific evaluation of modern clinical research: we need a new currency!Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery has been serving as a publication platform for clinical and scientific progress in the field of surgery for 150 years. In order to maintain this long-standing tradition throughout the coming decades, it will be mandatory to face the challenges posed by increasing specialization of surgical subdisciplines, modern technologies, and interdisciplinary treatment options. DISCUSSION: Continued efforts need to be directed at minimizing surgical trauma, not at least with respect to current demographic development. Adoption of progressive technologies from the fields of biophysics, mechatronics, and biomedical imaging solutions will likely gain a major impact on the further development of surgical operation techniques. Expanding insight from genomic and molecular medicine will facilitate personalized, interdisciplinary treatment concepts for malignant disease, in which surgical resection techniques will need to be integrated. The introduction of novel diagnostic and treatment concepts will mandate solid evaluation of their clinical effectiveness and safety, which can only be achieved by randomized, controlled trials in the field of surgery.
conclusionExtracting study ideas from the contributions by clinicians and basic scientists, and promoting the conduction of clinical trials will therefore range among the most important tasks for the Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery in the 21st century.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20213464What 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.