Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23778426›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2013

IDEAL framework for surgical innovation 2: observational studies in the exploration and assessment stages.

Patrick L Ergina, Jeffrey S Barkun, Peter McCulloch, Jonathan A Cook, Douglas G Altman, IDEAL Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–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

94 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Robot-assisted stereotactic brain biopsy: systematic review and bibliometric analysis.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Implementation of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy From a Randomized Controlled Trial Setting to National Practice.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Patrick L ErginaCardiothoracic Surgery Division, McGill University Health Centre, Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1A1. patrick.ergina@muhc.mcgill.ca
Jeffrey S Barkun
Peter McCulloch
Jonathan A Cook
Douglas G Altman
IDEAL Group

Funding

Department of Health 06/301/233Medical Research Council G0800800Medical Research Council G1002292
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Evaluation Studies as TopicInventionsHumansObservationSurgical Procedures, Operative

Identifiers

PMID23778426
PMCPMC3685514

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.