ArticleUrolithiasis2023
Paediatric Ureteroscopy (P-URS) reporting checklist: a new tool to aid studies report the essential items on paediatric ureteroscopy for stone disease.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adult Ureteroscopy (A-URS) Checklist: A New Tool To Standardise Reporting in Endourology.European urology open science · 2023Article
- Comparison and Evaluation of Outcomes of Ureteroscopy and Stone Laser Fragmentation in Extremes of Age Groups (≤10 Years and ≥80 Years of Age): A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of over 15 Years from 2 Tertiary European Centres.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Utilization of Flexible Ureteroscopy in Renal Stones Management in Pediatrics: Single Tertiary Center Experience.Global pediatric health · 2023Article
- Paediatric kidney stone surgery: state-of-the-art review.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
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 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The burden of urolithiasis in children is increasing and this is mirrored by the number of surgical interventions in the form of ureteroscopy (URS). There exist many challenges in performing this surgery for this special patient group as well as a lack of consensus on technique. There is also large variation in how results are described and reported. There exists therefore, a need to improve and standardise the core outcomes, which are reported. To this end, we developed a new checklist to aid studies report the essential items on paediatric URS for stone disease. The Paediatric Ureteroscopy (P-URS) reporting checklist comprises four main sections (study details, pre-operative, operative and post-operative) and a total of 20 items. The tool covers a range of important elements, such as pre-stenting, complications, follow-up, stone-free rate, concomitant medical expulsive therapy and imaging, which are often lacking in studies. The checklist provides a summary of essential items that authors can use as a reference to improve general standards of reporting paediatric URS studies and increase the body of knowledge shared accordingly.
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.