ArticleTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2021
Evaluating quality and completeness of gastrectomy for gastric cancer: review of surgical videos from the public domain.
Article in Translational gastroenterology and hepatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Video-based tools for surgical quality assessment of technical skills in laparoscopic procedures: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Social media in surgery: evolving role in research communication and beyond.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundYouTube
methodsYouTube
resultsTen laparoscopic and 10 open surgery videos were assessed. Each video was scored for quality and completeness and assigned a score out of 22. Mean score for open D2-LND was 15 (95% CI: 12.54-17.46). Mean score for laparoscopic D2-LND was 15.4 (95% CI: 14.34-16.46; P=0.77). The most consistently performed steps were the dissection of lymph node stations 1, 3, 4 and 5. The most commonly omitted steps were the dissection of lymph node station 6: exposure and identification of the lowest anterior superior pancreaticoduodenal vein; removal of the prepancreatic soft tissues above the lowest anterior superior pancreaticoduodenal vein; removal of the prepancreatic soft tissues above the level of the bifurcation of the anterior superior pancreaticoduodenal vein and right gastroepiploic vein.
conclusionsThere is a wide range of quality and completeness of D2-LND videos. On average, D2-LND videos are only two-thirds complete.
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.