Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22476532›Full record

SynthesisJournal of anesthesia2012

A comprehensive appraisal of meta-analyses focusing on nonsurgical treatments aimed at decreasing perioperative mortality or major cardiac complications.

Massimo Zambon, Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, Elena Bignami, Laura Ruggeri, Alberto Zangrillo, Giovanni Landoni

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of anesthesia, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Major themes for 2012 in cardiovascular anesthesia and intensive care.HSR proceedings in intensive care & cardiovascular anesthesia · 2013
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Massimo ZambonDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai
Elena Bignami
Laura Ruggeri
Alberto Zangrillo
Giovanni Landoni

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMillions of patients worldwide who undergo surgical procedures face significant morbidity and mortality risks. Several systematic reviews have been performed on ancillary treatments aimed at improving surgical outcomes, but their features and scholarly impact are unclear. We describe characteristics of meta-analyses on ancillary treatments aimed at improving surgical outcomes and explore factors associated with scholarly citations.

methodsSystematic reviews published up to 2008 were searched without language restrictions in MEDLINE/PubMed. Reviews focusing on nonsurgical treatments aimed at decreasing mortality or major cardiac complications were included. Associations between content, quality, and bibliometric details and scholarly citations in several indexes were systematically appraised.

resultsFrom 2,239 citations, 84 systematic reviews were identified. Patients most commonly underwent cardiovascular surgery (40.2%), and were tested for cardiovascular drugs (25.8%), with placebo acting as control (38.1%). Internal validity appeared largely robust, as most (50.5%) reviews were at low risk of bias. Normalized yearly citations for the included reviews ranged between 5.6 in Google Scholar and 4.3 in Web of Science. Multivariable analysis showed that citations were significantly and positively associated with number of authors, North American corresponding author, number of studies included, number of patients included, noncardiothoracic surgical scope, explicit funding, and lack of competing interests (all p < 0.05).

conclusionsSystematic reviews currently represent a key element in defining state of the art ancillary treatments of patients undergoing surgery. However, the citation success of available meta-analyses is not significantly associated with prognostically relevant findings or quality features.

Indexed as

Meta-Analysis as TopicAnesthesiaBibliometricsHeart DiseasesHumansIntraoperative ComplicationsPerioperative CarePerioperative PeriodPostoperative ComplicationsPublication BiasRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.