ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Surgical interventions for gastric cancer: a review of systematic reviews.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- eIF6 Promotes Gastric Cancer Proliferation and Invasion by Regulating Cell Cycle.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024Article
- Exosomal circ_0001190 Regulates the Progression of Gastric Cancer via miR-586/SOSTDC1 Axis.Biochemical genetics · 2022Article
- Proteomic characterization of gastric cancer response to chemotherapy and targeted therapy reveals new therapeutic strategies.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Identification of AKIRIN2 as a potential biomarker and correlation with immunotherapy in gastric adenocarcinoma by integrated bioinformatics analysis.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- EIF3B is associated with poor outcomes in gastric cancer patients and promotes cancer progression via the PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway.Cancer management and research · 2019Article
- Effect of laparoscopic gastrectomy on compliance with adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer.Medicine · 2017Observational
- Is there a dose-dependent effect of genetic susceptibility loci for gastric cancer on prognosis of the patients?Oncotarget · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate methodological quality and the extent of concordance among meta-analysis and/or systematic reviews on surgical interventions for gastric cancer (GC).
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane library and the DARE database was conducted to identify the reviews comparing different surgical interventions for GC prior to April 2014. After applying included criteria, available data were summarized and appraised by the Oxman and Guyatt scale.
resultsFifty six reviews were included. Forty five reviews (80.4%) were well conducted, with scores of adapted Oxman and Guyatt scale ≥ 14. The reviews differed in criteria for avoiding bias and assessing the validity of the primary studies. Many primary studies displayed major methodological flaws, such as randomization, allocation concealment, and dropouts and withdrawals. According to the concordance assessment, laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) was superior to open gastrectomy, and laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy was superior to open distal gastrectomy in short-term outcomes. However, the concordance regarding other surgical interventions, such as D1 vs. D2 lymphadenectomy, and robotic gastrectomy vs. LAG were absent.
conclusionSystematic reviews on surgical interventions for GC displayed relatively high methodological quality. The improvement of methodological quality and reporting was necessary for primary studies. The superiority of laparoscopic over open surgery was demonstrated. But concordance on other surgical interventions was rare, which needed more well-designed RCTs and systematic reviews.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26550311PMC4612996What 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.