ArticleCureus2020
The Hidden Work of Urology Residents - A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2020. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Workload generated by external consults in an Irish tertiary vascular centre.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Inpatient urology consultations: intervention rates, determinant factors, and findings related to the refugee population.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Visualizing grades of hematuria for communication enhancement and continuous bladder irrigation guidance.Urology annalsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn a tertiary care hospital that caters to all kinds of patients in the clinical and emergency setting, consultation is an important service provided by the urology team. Profiling the spectrum of urologic disease encountered by trainees will assist in the planning of residency curricula and is bound to improve patient outcome for procedural education.
methodsAll urologic consultation requests received over a period of three months (November 22, 2019, to February 22, 2020) were identified and recorded in a prospectively maintained consult log. Information collected for each encounter included the time, date, reason for consult, primary service and diagnosis along with the final urologic diagnosis, any urologic intervention, and basic patient demographics (gender and age).
resultsOver three months, a total of 568 consult requests were reviewed. Of the patients consulted for, 74% were males; the mean age was 58.45 years (SD+/-19.5 years). The most common service seeking urology consult was the Emergency Room (n=240, 42.25%). The most common reason for consultation was hematuria (n=103, 18.13%) followed by obstructive uropathy (n=98, 17.25%). The majority (n=147, 26%) of the calls were placed between mid-day and 4 pm. Of the total, 26% required immediate attention. Urologic intervention was required in 226 (39.8%). The number of consults seen by junior team members was 478 (84.14%).
conclusionHematuria and obstructive uropathy are the most common reasons for urologic consultation requests. Nearly two-thirds of the consults either required immediate attention or intervention. Most of the consults were seen by junior residents, who required elaborate training to address these common issues independently. We believe that our results will be helpful in developing a curriculum for training junior residents.
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.