ReviewPlastic and reconstructive surgery2010
Developing good clinical questions and finding the best evidence to answer those questions.
Review in Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The ability of artificial intelligence tools to formulate orthopaedic clinical decisions in comparison to human clinicians: An analysis of ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4, and Bard.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Multi-centric clinic trials in evidence-based research - A narrative review on the Indian scenario.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2023Review
- Organizing a Multidisciplinary Research Team: Strategies, Execution, and Outcomes.Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2019Article
- A bibliometric analysis of two decades of aromatherapy research.BMC research notes · 2017Article
- The levels of evidence and their role in evidence-based medicine.Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2011Article
- A guide to organizing a multicenter clinical trial.Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evidence-based medicine involves the integration of the best scientific evidence available with physician experience and patient preferences. One of the first steps in evidence-based medicine involves developing a question based on issues encountered with patients or a disease and finding evidence to answer the question. This article is a guide to plastic surgeons in how to begin the practice of evidence-based medicine by developing clinical questions and finding evidence to answer these questions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.