Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31080639›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2019

Prehabilitation for esophagectomy.

Emre Doganay, Krishna Moorthy

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Efficacy of enhanced prehabilitation for patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2021
    Article
  16. 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.

Emre DoganayDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Krishna MoorthyDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Esophagectomy remains the mainstay treatment of esophageal cancer (EC). Combined with neoadjuvant therapies, the management of EC has deleterious effects on body composition, functional capacity and psychological well-being. Preoperative patient optimisation known as prehabilitation is a novel intervention aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality associated with the trajectory of EC care. There is emerging evidence to suggest that prehabilitation is safe, feasible and efficacious. In addition, there is strong data to infer that prehabilitation has a positive effect on functional capacity through exercise. Nutritional and psychological interventions are less well evaluated. Furthermore, no convincing relationship between prehabilitation and oncological outcomes has been demonstrated. Early studies evaluating prehabilitation are promising however further large scale research is required in order to assess the clinical effectiveness.

Indexed as

exercisenutritionPrehabilitationpreoperative optimization

Identifiers

PMID31080639
PMCPMC6503267

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.