SynthesisObesity surgery2021
No Uniformity in the References of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Bariatric Surgery: a Review of 3 Similar Guidelines Published in 2020.
Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2021. 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.
- Evaluation of the Impact of ChatGPT on the Selection of Surgical Technique in Bariatric Surgery.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- Paired Editorial of "Evaluation of Impact of Chat GPT on the Selection of Surgical Technique in Bariatric Surgery".Obesity surgery · 2024Article
- Bariatric Surgery for Patients with Overweight/Obesity. A Comprehensive Grading Methodology and Network Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on Weight Loss Outcomes and Adverse Events.Obesity surgery · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2020, updated versions of the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, the Canadian Adult Obesity Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Dutch Federation for Medical Specialist clinical practice guidelines on bariatric surgery were published. We systematically reviewed and compared them on recommendations and references. Although the authors would have had access to the same literature, only 5 out of 655 unique references were used by all 3 guidelines and just 49 references by any combination of 2 guidelines. These findings attest to the subjectivity involved in clinical practice guidelines development and could be the cause for the observed differences in recommendations. International cooperation in guideline development might be a conceivable solution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34655055What 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.