ArticleMedicine2019
Quality of life in patients who undergo conventional or robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy: Protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Protocol for a modified vaginal pipe for total laparoscopic hysterectomies: Experimental research.International journal of surgery protocols · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHysterectomy for benign gynecologic diseases, especially dysfunctional uterine bleeding, is one of the most common gynecologic interventions. The uterus can be removed using abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic, or robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. In a robotic-assisted procedure, the surgeon directs the robot while seated at a console in the operating room. This differs from laparoscopic hysterectomy because a "robot" performs the operation, while the surgeon watches a monitor. This systematic review will compare quality of life (QOL) in patients who undergo total robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign indications and those who undergo conventional laparoscopic surgery.
methodsWe will perform a systematic review according to the Cochrane Methodology for randomized controlled trials. The review will include studies reporting use of QOL metrics to assess patients who undergo total hysterectomy for benign indications using robotic-assisted technique or conventional laparoscopic surgery. QOL will be the primary outcome and will be measured using validated instruments. An overall search strategy will be developed and adapted for Embase, MEDLINE, LILACS, and CENTRAL databases. Two reviewers will independently select the eligible studies, assess the risk of bias, and extract the data from included studies. Similar outcomes measured in at least 2 trials will be plotted in the meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.3. The quality of evidence will be determined using the GRADE approach.
resultsThis systematic review is designed to provide high quality evidence on QOL in patients undergoing total hysterectomy for benign indications using either robotic-assisted or conventional laparoscopic surgery.
conclusionIt is expected that high-quality evidence on QOL can be used to guide decision-making by institutions and clinicians to improve health care; the evidence can also be used in future studies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD 42019129913.
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.