Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26170968›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2015

Bladder reconstruction: The past, present and future.

Omar M S El-Taji, Altaf Q Khattak, Syed A Hussain

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. From waste to wealth: Repurposing slaughterhouse waste for xenotransplantation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    Article
  5. Bladder Replacement Therapy.Bladder (San Francisco, Calif.) · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Stoma-related complications and emergencies.International journal of emergency medicine · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. [Advance in functional bladder engineering].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2020
    Review
  14. Bladder Augmentation Using LyoplantTissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2019
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Bladder Sparing Approaches for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancers.Current treatment options in oncology · 2016
    Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Omar M S El-TajiDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool L7 8XP, UK.
Altaf Q KhattakDepartment of Urology, St. Helen's & Knowsley NHS Teaching Hospitals, University of Liverpool, Prescot L35 5DR, United Kingdom.
Syed A HussainDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3GA, United Kingdom.
Royal Liverpool University Hospital · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ileal conduit urinary diversion is the gold standard treatment for urinary tract reconstruction following cystectomy. This procedure uses gastrointestinal segments for bladder augmentation, a technique that is often associated with significant complications. The substantial progression in the fields of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine over the previous two decades has resulted in the development of techniques that may lead to the construction of functional

Indexed as

bladderreconstructionregenerative medicinetissue engineeringurology

Identifiers

PMID26170968
PMCPMC4487078
OpenAlexW1986051181

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.