ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2013
We may not have it all together, but together we have it all. The importance of intra- and interdisciplinary collaboration.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The tremendous development of knowledge, the accumulation of clinical experience, and the enriching of everyday practice with the results of basic and clinical research created the need for splitting medicine in specialities and sub-specialities. Although this evolution is inevitable in order to meet the complex needs and demands of patients, we have to be aware of the risk of neglecting the holistic approach of a person in distress. Indeed, the organ-focused and pathology-centred approach of a patient may not exempt us of the rudiments of care such as the notion that a human being is more than the sum of its parts. This involves the absolute obligation for intra and inter-disciplinary cooperation. Recently, the European leading societies in Gynaecology, the European Board Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (EBCOG), the European Society of Human reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) and the European Academy for Gynaecological Surgery (+he Academy), have established some common impressive initiatives to improve women's health care. As a result of an intensive research programme coordinated by +he Academy with a multidisciplinary team of gynaecologists and surgeons a unique structured training and certification programme in endoscopic surgery is established. This project is a fine example making the dream of multidisciplinary approach reality and achieving some most impressive results. It is without any doubt a major step forwards in the improvement of the quality -assurance in endoscopic surgery in benefit of the patients care and has been accepted by our leading European and national societies. Recently, ESGE and ESHRE developed a new classification on female genital anomalies. An evidence-based -updated new classification published in the official journal of both societies was the ended result. THIS CREATIVE, SUCCESSFUL AND UNEVENTFUL COLLABORATION UNDERLINES THE NEED FOR RESPECTING SOME CRUCIAL POINTS: to clearly outline the topic of common action, to find the working platform, to define the method and to respect -independence of each society by clarifying the borders and the responsibilities. Keeping the window of the collaboration open is crucial for keeping the window to medicine of the future unlocked.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24753950PMC3987375What 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.