Suprapubic versus urethral catheter drainage in robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: advancing systematic review quality.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Suprapubic Versus Urethral Catheter for Urinary Drainage After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.Current urology reports · 2020
   Review
2. Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Transperineal Puncture: A Viable Alternative for Difficult Removal of an Indwelling Catheter in a Postrobot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Patient.Journal of endourology case reports · 2020
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Supra-pubic versus urethral catheter after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: systematic review of current evidence.2018

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as