ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2016
From NELA to EPOCH and beyond: enhancing the evidence base for emergency laparotomy.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Reporting of health-related quality of life in emergency laparotomy trials: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Pooled it
- Unplanned interventions following bariatric surgery: first cohort outcomes from the National Emergency Bariatric Surgery Audit (NEBSA).International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- 30-Day mortality risk predictors for emergency laparotomy: a comparative study.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2026Article
- Costs of surgical futility in emergency laparotomy.Surgery in practice and science · 2025Article
- Derivation and validation of a prognostic model for postoperative risk stratification of critically ill patients with faecal peritonitis.Annals of intensive care · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Around 35,000 patients undergo emergency laparotomy surgery in the UK each year with an in-hospital 30-day mortality estimated as between 11 and 15 %. The recent publication of the First Patient Report of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) has provided a detailed description of individual hospital performance against national standards of care in emergency laparotomy in England and Wales. Although the standards used for audit purposes in NELA are based upon the best currently available evidence, none of the source data derives from randomised controlled studies. This commentary explores the evidence base for the standards evaluated by NELA and highlights recent and forthcoming studies that may substantially contribute to improving the evidence base in this area, thereby improving patient care and strengthening the validity of the NELA audit standards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.