ReviewLangenbeck's archives of surgery2012
Surgical evaluation and knowledge transfer--methods of clinical research in surgery.
Review in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evidence-based surgery: barriers, solutions, and the role of evidence synthesis.World journal of surgery · 2012Pooled it
- Trial
- Distinct challenges faced by surgeons in conducting and publishing surgical research: implications for training, ethics, and academic surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Review
- Lost in translation: the lack of agreement between surgeons and scientists regarding biomaterials research and innovation for treating bone defects.BMC medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Development of a conceptual framework for reporting modifications in surgical innovation: scoping review.BJS open · 2023Article
- Visualization of the recurrent laryngeal nerve alone versus intraoperative nerve monitoring in primary thyroidectomy: a framework approach to a missing typology.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Review
- Computer-assisted 3D bowel length measurement for quantitative laparoscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Article
- Future perspectives for surgical research in Germany.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2014Article
- [Clinical trials in surgery. On the way towards evidence-based surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2012Article
- The Study Centre of the German Surgical Society: current trials and results.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2012Review
- [Contribution of the Study Center of the German Surgical Society to evidence based surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2011Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis article aims to outline the framework of surgical evaluation and knowledge transfer. Therefore, special design issues affecting surgical clinical research will be discussed. Moreover, principles and challenges of knowledge transfer from research into practice will be addressed.
backgroundThe ultimate goal of academic surgery is to improve surgical and perioperative care in order to achieve the best outcomes for patients. Randomized controlled trials and reviews with and without meta-analyses are fundamental requirements for evidence-based decision making. DISCUSSION: Despite calls for more rigorous research methods in surgery, the frequency of high-quality randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews is low. Specific methodological and design issues have to be implemented for valid evaluation of surgical procedures. Thus, general catchwords of clinical epidemiology such as timing, randomization, registration, and reporting standards demand special appraisal. Moreover, blinding methods, placebo controls, learning curves, standardized outcome assessment, and generalizability are critical design issues in surgical trials. Moreover, systematic reviews and meta-analyses are desirable for answering clinical issues or defining new research questions.
conclusionFor a rigorous evaluation of surgical procedures, a basic understanding of research methodology is urgently needed, and to improve methodological expertise, collaboration between surgeons and methodologists is encouraged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21424797What 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.