ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018
Effect of academic status on outcomes of surgery for rectal cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of surgeon and hospital factors on length of stay after colorectal surgery systematic review.BJS open · 2022Pooled it
- Health Disparities among Patients with Cancer Who Received Molecular Testing for Biomarker-Directed Therapy.Cancer research communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Evolution of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer: update from the national cancer database.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of our study was to investigate surgical outcomes following advanced colorectal procedures at academic versus community institutions.
methodsThe SPARCS database was used to identify patients undergoing Abdominoperineal resection (APR) and Low Anterior Resection between 2009 and 2014. Linear mixed models and generalized linear mixed models were used to compare outcomes. Laparoscopic versus open procedures, surgery type, volume status, and stoma formation between academic and community facilities were compared.
resultsHigher percentages of laparoscopic surgeries (58.68 vs. 41.32%, p value < 0.0001), more APR surgeries (64.60 vs. 35.40%, p value < 0.0001), more high volume hospitals (69.46 vs. 30.54%, p value < 0.0001), and less stoma formation (48.00 vs. 52.00%, p value < 0.0001) were associated with academic centers. After adjusting for confounding factors, academic facilities were more likely to perform APR surgeries (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04-1.74, p value = 0.0235). Minorities and Medicaid patients were more likely to receive care at an academic facility. Stoma formation, open surgery, and APR were associated with longer LOS and higher rate of ED visit and 30-day readmission.
conclusionLaparoscopy and APR are more commonly performed at academic than community facilities. Age, sex, race, and socioeconomic status affect the facility at which and the type of surgery patients receive, thereby influencing surgical outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29218672What 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.