ArticleBMJ open2019
Comparative long-term effectiveness and safety of primary bariatric surgeries in treating type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Bariatric Surgery on Metabolic Syndrome, Framingham Risk Scores and Thyroid Function during One-Year Follow-Up: A Saudi Retrospective Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Comparative effectiveness of bariatric surgeries in patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2020Review
- A compound reflects the level of homocysteine based on Rhodamine B and its ability to respond to homocysteine in the plasma of diabetic patients.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBariatric surgeries are effective in treating obesity related comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes mellitus. More robust evidence is needed to facilitate choice of procedure. In this systemic review, we aim to investigate the comparative long-term effectiveness in inducing remission of type 2 diabetes, halting diabetic complications, reducing mortality and the safety of conventional and emerging bariatric surgeries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Databases including Cochrane Central Register, EMBASE, MEDLINE and clinical trial registries will be searched for randomised controlled trials with at least 3 years of follow-up, including direct and/or indirect evidence regarding primary bariatric surgeries in overweight or obese adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus, from inception of each database to 2019, with no language or publication type limits imposed. Dual selection of studies, data extraction and risk of bias assessments will be performed. Primary outcomes include full diabetes remission, composite outcome of full or partial diabetes remission and adverse event profiles. Secondary outcomes include anthropometric measurements, cardiovascular risk factor burden, medication burden, diabetic complications and all-cause mortality. Given sufficient homogeneity, network meta-analyses will be performed in a random-effects model based on the Bayesian framework, while assessing for consistency between direct and indirect estimates. Heterogeneities of studies will be explored through meta-regression analysis, and robustness of findings will be checked by sensitivity analysis, and an alternative method under a frequentist framework. All statistical analysis and graphical presentations will be conducted by R software V.3.3.3 (The R Project for Statistical Computing). The overall quality of the evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria for each outcome. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as individual patient data will not be included. This review will be subject for publication in a peer reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018110775.
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.