Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35018257›Full record

ArticleCureus2021

UK Trainee Cardiothoracic Surgeons' Perceptions of Public Outcome Reporting in Surgery: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Prasanna Ganeshan, Milad Baburi

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Prasanna GaneshanAnaesthesia/Intensive Care Medicine, New Cross Hospital, Birmingham, GBR.
Milad BaburiStroke, Russells Hall Hospital, Birmingham, GBR.
Russells Hall Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Since 2004, the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and Ireland has reported outcomes of named surgeons. In 2013, the National Health Service England published outcome data for 10 specialties, including cardiothoracic surgery. Before this, no consistent and major stakeholder feedback had occurred. This is the first study to assess UK trainee cardiothoracic surgeons' perceptions of public outcome reporting (POR) in surgery. Methodology In this study, first, an online survey was sent to all trainee cardiothoracic surgeons (n = 257) in the UK. The survey had a response rate of 17%. Second, 10 semi-structured, one-to-one interviews were conducted with trainee cardiothoracic surgeons who had completed the survey. Results The majority of respondents opposed the public release of surgeon-specific mortality data in adult cardiac surgery. It is believed to be associated with several consequences, including risk aversion, 'gaming', and detriments to the training and development of surgeons. Despite this, the majority of respondents favoured the POR of alternative outcome measures, including unit mortality, which provides a better indicator for the overall quality of care provided to patients. Conclusions Trainee cardiothoracic surgeons accept and approve of POR. However, policymakers should refine the current strategy if they are to receive full support from the future of the specialty.

Indexed as

adult cardiac surgeryadult thoracic surgerycongenital cardiothoracic surgeryhealthcare policy and managementsurgical outcomes research

Identifiers

PMID35018257
PMCPMC8738917
OpenAlexW4200293002

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.