Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30647549›Full record

ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2019

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Interactive Audit System: 10 Years' Experience with an International Web-Based Clinical and Research Perioperative Care Database.

Andrew Currie, Mattias Soop, Nicolas Demartines, Kenneth Fearon, Robin Kennedy, Olle Ljungqvist

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Principles of enhanced recovery in gastrointestinal surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Andrew CurrieDepartment of Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, United Kingdom.
Mattias SoopDepartment of Surgery, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Nicolas DemartinesDepartment of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Kenneth FearonDepartment of Surgery, University of Edinburgh and Colorectal Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Robin KennedyDepartment of Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, United Kingdom.
Olle LjungqvistDepartment of Surgery, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
St Mark's Hospital · GBÖrebro University Hospital · SESalford Royal Hospital · GBUniversity Hospital of Lausanne · CHUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a managed care program that has shown the ability to reduce complications following elective colorectal surgery. In 2006, the ERAS

Indexed as

auditoutcomesperioperative caresurgery

Identifiers

PMID30647549
PMCPMC6327717
OpenAlexW2910952301

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.