ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Do the research priorities identified in SAGES Delphi studies resonate with rural general surgeons: a Washington state perspective.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRural surgeons operate in an environment significantly different from that of their colleagues, and as such they face unique challenges. We hypothesized the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) research agenda (as identified in the results of the 2014 Delphi study) will differ in its priorities from those identified by rural surgeons. We aimed to pilot a study in Washington state that could be replicated in other areas of the USA and the world.
methodsWe identified general surgeons working at rural critical access hospitals in the state of Washington. We then conducted virtual, semi-structured interviews and followed up with surveys and site visits. The survey included the 2014 SAGES Delphi-ranked research priorities. We asked rural surgeons to rank their top 5 of these 40 priorities and to detail any additional which were not on the list.
resultsWe contacted 79 surgeons with a 30% response rate. We conducted 25 semi-structured interviews and received 18 completed follow-up surveys. These interviews were followed by site visits at 4 of the 23 sites. Of the original Delphi research priorities, those most cited by rural surgeons were #8 ("What is the best method for incorporating new techniques and technology for surgeons of variable levels of experience or training?") and #1 ("How do we best train, assess, and maintain proficiency of surgeons and surgical trainees in flexible endoscopy, laparoscopy, and open surgery?"). Four surgeons included the last SAGES priority (#40 "Is quality of life improved after ventral hernia repair?") among their top 5.
conclusionThis study suggests that although rural surgeons' research priorities align with the published SAGES Delphi survey, these surgeons rank the priorities differently. This may be because the predominant study population of the Delphi is SAGES membership who work in urban and academic centers. Plans for future SAGES Delphi survey could capture these unique priorities by intentional involvement of rural and community surgeons.
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.