Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30186049›Full record

ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2018

Appendiceal Neoplasms.

Quinton M Hatch, Erin W Gilbert

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Evaluation of factors predicting appendiceal tumoral lesions in patients undergoing appendectomy for acute appendicitis.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Acute appendicitis-advances and controversies.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021
    Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Quinton M HatchDivision of Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Erin W GilbertDivision of Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Appendiceal neoplasms are identified in 0.9 to 1.4% of appendiceal specimens, and the incidence is increasing. It has long been professed that neuroendocrine tumors (formerly carcinoids) are the most common neoplastic process of the appendix; recent data, however, has suggested a shift in epidemiology. Our intent is to distill the complex into an algorithm, and, in doing so, enable the surgeon to seamlessly maneuver through operative decisions, treatment strategies, and patient counseling. The algorithm for evaluation and treatment is complex, often starts from the nonspecific presenting complaint of appendicitis, and relies heavily on often subtle histopathologic differences.

Indexed as

adenoneuroendocrine carcinomaappendiceal neoplasmsappendiceal neuroendocrine tumorsgastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumorspseudomyxoma peritonei

Identifiers

PMID30186049
PMCPMC6123007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.