Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34523005›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2022

New Operative Reporting Standards: Where We Stand Now and Opportunities for Innovation.

Jacqueline M Soegaard Ballester, Kristin E Goodsell, Jae P Ermer, Giorgos C Karakousis, John T Miura, Nicole M Saur, Najjia N Mahmoud, Ari Brooks, Julia C Tchou, Peter E Gabriel and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

12 authors.

Jacqueline M Soegaard BallesterDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Kristin E GoodsellUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jae P ErmerDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Giorgos C KarakousisDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
John T MiuraDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Nicole M SaurDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Najjia N MahmoudDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Ari BrooksDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Julia C TchouDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Peter E GabrielUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Lawrence N ShulmanUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Heather WachtelDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. heather.wachtel@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.

Funding

Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardKL2TR001879 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MEAGHER, EMMA ANNE · 2016 to 2025
$13.7M
A genotype-phenotype study of germline succinate dehydrogenase pathogenic variantsK08CA270385 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Heather Wachtel · 2022 to 2026
$967k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001879NCATS NIH HHS KL2-TR001879NCI NIH HHS K08 CA270385
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer's (CoC) new operative standards for breast cancer, melanoma, and colon cancer surgeries will require that surgeons provide synoptic documentation of essential oncologic elements within operative reports. Prior to designing and implementing an electronic tool to support synoptic reporting, we evaluated current documentation practices at our institution to understand baseline concordance with these standards.

methodsApplicable procedures performed between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2018 were included. Two independent reviewers evaluated sequential operative notes, up to a total of 100 notes, for documentation of required elements. Complete concordance (CC) was defined as explicit documentation of all required CoC elements. Mean percentage CC and surgeon-specific CC were calculated for each procedure. Interrater reliability was assessed via Cohen's kappa statistic.

resultsFor sentinel lymph node biopsy, mean CC was 66% (n = 100), with surgeon-specific CC ranging from 6 to 100%, and for axillary dissection, mean CC was 12% (n = 89) and surgeon-specific CC ranged from 0 to 47%. The single surgeon performing melanoma wide local excision had a mean CC of 98% (n = 100). For colon resections, mean CC was 69% (n = 96) and surgeon-specific CC ranged from 39 to 94%. Kappa scores were 0.77, 0.78, -0.15, and 0.78, respectively.

conclusionsWe identified heterogeneity in current documentation practices. In our cohort, rates of baseline concordance varied across surgeons and procedures. Currently, documentation elements are interspersed within the operative report, posing challenges to chart abstraction with resulting imperfect interrater reliability. This presents an exciting opportunity to innovate and improve compliance by introducing an electronic synoptic documentation tool.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyDocumentationFemaleHumansLymph Node ExcisionReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID34523005
PMCPMC13339693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.