Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24293837›Full record

ReviewJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2012

Pearls and pitfalls of mesh surgery.

Ajay Rane, Jay Iyer

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 87% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ajay RaneDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD Australia.
Jay Iyer
James Cook University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis article attempts to offer balanced insight into the use of transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse especially in the light of the negative publicity in recent times. The role of transvaginal mesh has been in the limelight for a number of reasons and it is important to address this issue in an objective, fair, and balanced manner. The conventional approach to prolapse surgery has undergone a paradigm shift and the principles of mesh replacement surgery sharply contrast with many traditionally held beliefs. This has created a new set of challenges that has revealed a sharp division of opinion among specialists and sub-specialists alike.

conclusionThe article is an attempt to explain how mesh surgery can be safely and efficiently performed in carefully selected cases and is based on the combined wisdom of some of the leading surgeons in the sub-specialty today.

Indexed as

Pearls and pitfallsReconstructive pelvic floor surgeryUse of mesh

Identifiers

PMID24293837
PMCPMC3575899
OpenAlexW2077623828

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.