Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29259063›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2017

Frequency of equivocation in surgical meta-evidence: a review of systematic reviews within IBD literature.

John D Delaney, John T Holbrook, Robert K Dewar, Patrick J Laws, Alexander F Engel

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

John D DelaneyColorectal Surgery, Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0693-9089
John T HolbrookRoyal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Robert K DewarColorectal Surgery, Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Patrick J LawsPrince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Alexander F EngelDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the level of equivocation among level 1 evidence in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease and determine whether any predisposing factors are present.

methodMEDLINE, Embase, CINHAL and Cochrane were searched from 2006 to 2017. Papers were scored using AMSTAR and categorised into surgical (S), medical (M) or medical and surgical (MS) groups. The ability of each paper to make a recommendation and conclusiveness in doing so was recorded.

results278 papers were assessed. 82% (n=227) could make a recommendation, 18% (n=51) could not. There was a significant difference in ability to provide a recommendation between S and M (P=0.003) but not MS and M (P=0.022) nor S and MS (P=0.79). Where a recommendation was made, S papers were more likely to be tempered than M papers (P=0.014) but not MS papers (P=0.987).

conclusionsSurgical meta-evidence within the inflammatory bowel disease domain is more than twice as likely as medical meta-evidence to be unable to provide a recommendation for clinical practice. Where a recommendation was made, surgical reviews were twice as likely to temper their conclusion.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalMeta-Analysis as TopicBiomedical ResearchDecision MakingEvidence-Based PracticeHumansInflammatory Bowel DiseasesPublicationsSystematic Reviews as Topicinflammatory bowel diseasesurgery

Identifiers

PMID29259063
PMCPMC5778281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.