Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27604704›Full record

ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2016

[Urolithiasis guidelines: retrospective view and perspectives].

C Türk

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03307096 (Evaluation of Two Different Treatments for Lower Pore Renal Stone), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03307096 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of Two Different Treatments for Lower Pore Renal Stone: Microperc Vs FURS

TypeinterventionalSponsorNingbo No. 1 HospitalRan2017 to 2019Enrolled0ConditionsSurgery--Complications, Renal Calculus, Nephrolithiasis, UrolithiasisArmsMicroperc surgery, FURS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

1 author.

C TürkUrologische Praxis und Steinzentrum, Ziehrerplatz 7/7, 1030, Wien, Österreich. office@tuerk.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The first German guidelines on urolithiasis were published in four sections in "Der Urologe A" in 1997 and were listed at The Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) in 1999. The European Association of Urology (EAU) published the first guidelines on urolithiasis in 2000. All guidelines must be updated on a regular basis. Guidelines should represent the highest level of evidence for the best diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, independent of economic pressure. Guidelines should safeguard optimal patient care and also serve as a basis for education and training of healthcare professionals. They are a tool for quality management and for national healthcare structures and strategies as well as for the judicature. Medical guidelines form the foundation for the elaboration of local clinical treatment pathways, which are the bridge to treatment of patients and also take economic and regional circumstances into consideration. In the future information technology (IT) could play an even more important role for both the complex methods of establishing guidelines and their implementation. The contents of guidelines could then be directly integrated into the clinical pathway, if necessary or into electronic patient charts in order to propose a medically and financially optimized treatment pathway. Because of the complexity of producing guidelines, they will in part be produced at a national level and adapted to the regional circumstances. Future technical, medical and genetic developments will lead to a multidisciplinary and multiprofessional cooperation in the production of guidelines.

Indexed as

EuropeEvidence-Based MedicineGermanyHumansPatient-Centered CarePractice Guidelines as TopicRadiologyUrolithiasisUrologyGuidelinesHealthcare planningHealthcare researchQuality managementUrinary stones

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.