Categories of Evidence and Methods in Surgical Decision-Making.

Samuel P Carmichael, David A Kline

Abstract readReview

In one paragraph

Review in The Surgical clinics of North America, 2023. 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

–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

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.

Samuel P CarmichaelDepartment of Surgery, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA. Electronic address: scarmich@wakehealth.edu.

David A KlineDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/dm_kline.

Funding

Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science AwardKL2TR001421 · NCATS · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI MILLER, DAVID P · 2015 to 2023

$5.8M

NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001421

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surgical decision-making is a continuum of judgments that take place during the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods. The fundamental, and most challenging, step is determining whether a patient will benefit from an intervention given the dynamic interplay of diagnostic, temporal, environmental, patient-centric, and surgeon-centric factors. The myriad combinations of these considerations generate a wide spectrum of reasonable therapeutic approaches within the standards of care. Although surgeons may seek evidenced-based practices to support their decision-making, threats to the validity of evidence and appropriate application of evidence may influence implementation. Furthermore, a surgeon's conscious and unconscious biases may additionally determine individual practice.

Indexed as

Decision MakingSurgeonsHumansEvidence-based practiceLevels of evidenceRisk assessmentSurgical decision-making

Identifiers

PMID36948715

DOI10.1016/j.suc.2022.11.001

PMCPMC11221629

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceTDM

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.