Settling the Controversy-Appendectomy as the Criterion for Appendicitis Diagnosis.

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.

1. Global practices and attitudes in acute appendicitis management: the PAMAP-W international survey and Delphi consensus study on the WSES appendicitis grading system.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2026
   Article
2. Appendiceal neoplasms derived from appendiceal tip remnants following appendectomy: a report of two cases.Surgical case reports · 2024
   Article
3. Controversies and Future Directions in Management of Acute Appendicitis: An Updated Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Complicated and Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis Are Different Diseases-Do Not Compare Apples With Oranges.2019
• Comment on
  Risk of Appendiceal Neoplasm in Periappendicular Abscess in Patients Treated With Interval Appendectomy vs Follow-up With Magnetic Resonance Imaging: 1-Year Outcomes of the Peri-Appendicitis Acuta Randomized Clinical Trial.2019

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as