Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33666183›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

Standard reporting elements for the performance of EUS: Recommendations from the FOCUS working group.

Suqing Li, Marc Monachese, Misbah Salim, Naveen Arya, Anand V Sahai, Nauzer Forbes, Christopher Teshima, Mohammad Yaghoobi, Yen-I Chen, Eric Lam and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

11 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Suqing LiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Marc MonacheseDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Misbah SalimDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Naveen AryaDivision of Gastroenterology, Oakville Trafalgar Memorial Hospital, Oakville, Ontario, Canada.
Anand V SahaiDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Nauzer ForbesDepartment of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Christopher TeshimaDepartment of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Calgary, Toronto, Canada.
Mohammad YaghoobiDivision of Gastroenterology, McMaster University Medical Center, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Yen-I ChenDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada.
Eric LamDepartment of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Paul JamesDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
University Health Network · CAMcGill University Health Centre · CAMcMaster University Medical Centre · CAOakville-Trafalgar Memorial Hospital · CASt. Michael's Hospital · CAUniversité de Montréal · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Calgary · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesQuality indicators for the performance of EUS have been developed to monitor and improve service value and patient outcomes. To support the incorporation of these indicators and standardize EUS documentation, we propose standard EUS reporting elements for endosonographers and endoscopy units.

methodsA comprehensive literature search and review was performed to identify EUS quality indicators and key components of high-quality standardized EUS reporting. Guidance statements regarding standard EUS reporting elements were developed and reviewed at the Forum for Canadian Endoscopic Ultrasound (FOCUS) 2019 Annual Meeting.

resultsEUS reporting elements can be divided into preprocedural, intraprocedural, and postprocedural items. Preprocedural components include the type, indication, and urgency of the procedure and patient clinical information and consent. Intraprocedural components include the adequacy and extent of examination, relevant landmarks, lesion characteristics, sampling method, specimen quality, and intraprocedural adverse events. Postprocedural components include a summary and synthesis of relevant findings as well as recommended management and follow-up.

conclusionsStandardizing reporting elements may help improve the care of patients undergoing EUS procedures. Our review provides a practical guide and compilation of recommended reporting elements to ensure ongoing best practices and quality improvement in EUS.

Indexed as

EUSreporting elementsstandardization

Identifiers

PMID33666183
PMCPMC8098847
OpenAlexW3134530691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.