ArticleMedicine2018
The clinical and economic consequences of practice style variations in common surgical interventions: A protocol for systematic review.
Article in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Future Effects of COVID-19 on the Health System: Applying the Futures Wheel Method.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2022Article
- Blood pressure response to commonly administered antihypertensives for severe inpatient hypertension.PloS one · 2022Article
- The economic consequences of practice style variation in providing medical interventions: A systematic review of the literature.Journal of education and health promotion · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical intervention is one of the common therapeutic interventions applied to a vast class of diseases. Unwarranted variation in practice style in different locations is considered as practice style variations (PSVs), which cause undesirable effects on patient health status and economic consequences. The magnitude of the variations in surgical interventions and its effects on clinical outcomes of patients and also utilization of resources have been investigated in recent years. But the findings show considerable heterogeneities in magnitude and consequences. We develop a protocol to systematically review the current literature of PSV to explain the magnitude of PSV and its clinical and economic consequences.
methodThis systematic review will include observational and experimental studies to investigate magnitude and consequences of PSV in common surgical interventions, cardiovascular disease, urological, and ophthalmological diseases. Source of information is scientific databases, theses, clinical trials registrations website, and grey literature. A comprehensive electronic search will be conducted through PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, EMBASE, and Scopus databases. Studies are assessed systematically by 2 investigators. Methodological quality of the included studies is evaluated by the STROBE and CONSORT checklists. In case of data availability, we will pool findings of included studies by meta-analysis techniques in the CMA software. Subgroup analyses are based on the type of the interventions and selected diseases.
resultsThis study has ethical approval from ethical committee of Iran University of Medical Sciences, ethic code: IR.IUMS.REC1395.9221504203. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
conclusionA systematic review is considered as an appropriate scientific method for reaching a consensus on magnitude as well as consequences of PSV. Results of this study will help clinical experts to attain more knowledge about PSV and encourage them to use some tools such as clinical guidelines and shared decision making to alleviate its consequences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.