Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35047772›Full record

ReviewBMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies2019

Evolution of transanal total mesorectal excision according to the IDEAL framework.

Sapho Xenia Roodbeen, Annalisa Lo Conte, Allison Hirst, Marta Penna, Willem A Bemelman, Pieter J Tanis, Roel Hompes

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. The learning curve of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer is associated with local recurrence: results from a multicentre external audit.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sapho Xenia RoodbeenSurgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7846-9835
Annalisa Lo ConteSurgery, Mater Dei Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Allison HirstNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Marta PennaSurgery, Churchill University Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Willem A BemelmanSurgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pieter J TanisSurgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Roel HompesSurgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLChurchill Hospital · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tremendous innovations have taken place in surgical procedures, but contrary to drug development, this process has been unregulated in the past. IDEAL promotes a structured framework for the safe implementation and assessment of a new surgical technique or intervention, by describing five stages for evaluating and reporting of innovations:

Indexed as

minimally invasive surgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID35047772
PMCPMC8749305
OpenAlexW2963805046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.