Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36818424›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of surgery protocols2023

Recommendations for Intraoperative Adverse Events Data Collection in Clinical Studies and Study Protocols. An ICARUS Global Surgical Collaboration Study.

Giovanni E Cacciamani, Michael Eppler, Aref S Sayegh, Tamir Sholklapper, Muneeb Mohideen, Gus Miranda, Mitch Goldenberg, Rene J Sotelo, Mihir M Desai, Inderbir S Gill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of surgery protocols, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

10 authors.

Giovanni E CacciamaniUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8892-5539
Michael EpplerUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6336-5857
Aref S SayeghUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9320-2987
Tamir SholklapperUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2059-1966
Muneeb MohideenUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.
Gus MirandaUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6110-9024
Mitch GoldenbergUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4601-5721
Rene J SoteloUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.
Mihir M DesaiUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.
Inderbir S GillUSC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, US.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) occur and have the potential to impact the postoperative course. However, iAEs are underreported and are not routinely collected in the contemporary surgical literature. There is no widely utilized system for the collection of essential aspects of iAEs, and there is no established database for the standardization and dissemination of this data that likely have implications for outcomes and patient safety. The Intraoperative Complication Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration initiated a global effort to address these shortcomings, and the establishment of an adverse event data collection system is an essential step. In this study, we present the core-set variables for collecting iAEs that were based on the globally validated ICARUS criteria for surgical/interventional and anesthesiologic intraoperative adverse event collection and reporting. Material and Methods: This article includes three tools to capture the essential aspects of iAEs. The core-set variables were developed from the globally validated ICARUS criteria for reporting iAEs (item 1). Next, the summary table was developed to guide researchers in summarizing the accumulated iAE data in item 1 (item 2). Finally, this article includes examples of the method and results sections to include in a manuscript reporting iAE data (item 3). Then, 5 scenarios demonstrating best practices for completing items 1-3 were presented both in prose and in a video produced by the ICARUS collaboration. Dissemination: This article provides the surgical community with the tools for collecting essential iAE data. The ICARUS collaboration has already published the 13 criteria for reporting surgical adverse events, but this article is unique and essential as it actually provides the tools for iAE collection. The study team plans to collect feedback for future directions of adverse event collection and reporting. Highlights: This article represents a novel, fully-encompassing system for the data collection of intraoperative adverse events.The presented core-set variables for reporting intraoperative adverse events are not based solely on our opinion, but rather are synthesized from the globally validated ICARUS criteria for reporting intraoperative adverse events.Together, the included text, figures, and ICARUS collaboration-produced video should equip any surgeon, anesthesiologist, or nurse with the tools to properly collect intraoperative adverse event data.Future directions include translation of this article to allow for the widest possible adoption of this important collection system.

Indexed as

core set variablesdatabaseintraoperative adverse eventintraoperative complicationspatient dataprotocol developmentvariables

Identifiers

PMID36818424
PMCPMC9912855

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.