Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33239057›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of surgical oncology2020

Outcome quality standards in advanced ovarian cancer surgery.

Antoni Llueca, Anna Serra, Maria Teresa Climent, Blanca Segarra, Yasmine Maazouzi, Marta Soriano, Javier Escrig, on behalf MUAPOS Working Group

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of surgical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Early- versus late-onset mortality trends in breast and female genital cancers in Spain, 1999-2024.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. The Impact of Liquid Biopsy in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Care.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Antoni LluecaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University General Hospital of Castellón, Av Benicasim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain. antonillueca@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3723-8795
Anna SerraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University General Hospital of Castellón, Av Benicasim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain.
Maria Teresa ClimentDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University General Hospital of Castellón, Av Benicasim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain.
Blanca SegarraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University General Hospital of Castellón, Av Benicasim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain.
Yasmine MaazouziDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University General Hospital of Castellón, Av Benicasim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain.
Marta SorianoMultidisciplinary Unit of Abdominal Pelvic Oncology Surgery (MUAPOS), University General Hospital of Castellón, Av Benicasim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain.
Javier EscrigMultidisciplinary Unit of Abdominal Pelvic Oncology Surgery (MUAPOS), University General Hospital of Castellón, Av Benicasim s/n, 12004, Castellón, Spain.
on behalf MUAPOS Working Group
Hospital General Universitari de Castelló · ESUniversitat Jaume I · ES

Funding

Instituto de Salud Carlos III ISCIII-FEDER (PI17/01945)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAdvanced ovarian cancer surgery (AOCS) frequently results in serious postoperative complications. Because managing AOCS is difficult, some standards need to be established that allow surgeons to assess the quality of treatment provided and consider what aspects should improve. This study aimed to identify quality indicators (QIs) of clinical relevance and to establish their acceptable quality limits (i.e., standard) in AOCS. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe performed a systematic search on clinical practice guidelines, consensus conferences, and reviews on the outcome and quality of AOCS to identify which QIs have clinical relevance in AOCS. We then searched the literature (from January 2006 to December 2018) for each QI in combination with the keywords of advanced ovarian cancer, surgery, outcome, and oncology. Standards for each QI were determined by statistical process control techniques. The acceptable quality limits for each QI were defined as being within the limits of the 99.8% interval, which indicated a favorable outcome.

resultsA total of 38 studies were included. The QIs selected for AOCS were complete removal of the tumor upon visual inspection (complete cytoreductive surgery), a residual tumor of < 1 cm (optimal cytoreductive surgery), a residual tumor of > 1 cm (suboptimal cytoreductive surgery), major morbidity, and 5-year survival. The rates of complete cytoreductive surgery, optimal cytoreductive surgery, suboptimal cytoreductive surgery, morbidity, and 5-year survival had quality limits of < 27%, < 23%, > 39%, > 33%, and < 27%, respectively.

conclusionOur results provide a general view of clinical indicators for AOCS. Acceptable quality limits that can be considered as standards were established.

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansNeoplasm, ResidualPrognosisAdvanced ovarian cancerCytoreductive surgeryMedical careMorbidityOutcomeQuality indicatorTumor

Identifiers

PMID33239057
PMCPMC7690155
OpenAlexW3107720381

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.