Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31175538›Full record

ReviewInternational urology and nephrology2019

Frailty as a prognostic indicator in the radical cystectomy population: a review.

Niki Parikh, Pranav Sharma

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International urology and nephrology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Urologic oncology patient perspectives during COVID-19 treatment delays.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  9. Factors predicting early mortality after radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma in a contemporary cohort of patients.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2020
    Article
  10. Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Niki ParikhDepartment of Urology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, 3601 4th Street STOP 7260, Lubbock, TX, 79430, USA.
Pranav SharmaDepartment of Urology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, 3601 4th Street STOP 7260, Lubbock, TX, 79430, USA. pranav.sharma@ttuhsc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3481-8700
Texas Tech University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radical cystectomy and urinary diversion are the current gold standard of management for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. While it is a common urologic procedure, it is associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. Complications associated with the operation are often frequent, although minor, and significantly impact functional outcomes as well as patient quality of life. Frailty is emerging as a new preoperative prognostic indicator to help determine which patients are at greatest risk of poor outcomes and postoperative complications after treatment. In this review, we summarize the current known literature analyzing frailty as a significant prognostic risk factor of short-term and long-term outcomes after radical cystectomy and urinary diversion in the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Indexed as

CystectomyAgedFrailtyGeriatric AssessmentHumansNeoplasm InvasivenessPrognosisRisk FactorsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsUrinary DiversionBladder cancerComplicationsFrailtyPrognostic indicatorRadical cystectomy

Identifiers

PMID31175538
OpenAlexW2953847194

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.