Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31649337›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2020

3D pelvic cadaver model: a novel approach to surgical training for penile implant surgery.

Koenraad van Renterghem, Ahmed Ghazi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of impotence research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Education in penile prosthesis implantation.International journal of impotence research · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Innovations in Urologic Surgical Training.Current urology reports · 2021
    Review
  9. Use of 3D printing in andrological surgery: what are the new perspectives.International journal of impotence research · 2020
    Review
  10. Simulation Training in Urology: State of the Art and Future Directions.Advances in medical education and practice · 2020
    Review
  11. Prosthetics in urology: Current status and future directions.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
    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.

Koenraad van RenterghemDepartment of Urology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium. koenraad.van.renterghem@telenet.be.
Ahmed GhaziDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Penile ProsthesisCadaverComputer-Aided DesignHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMalePenile ImplantationSurgery, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID31649337
PMCPMC8076011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.