ArticleBMJ open2023
Safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery among patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEnhanced recovery after surgery is widely used in the perioperative period in the field of urology; however, it lacks comprehensive and systematic evidence supporting its efficacy and safety after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Relevant databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database, Wanfang Database, Chinese Biomedical Document Service System, and Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database, will be searched from their inception to 19 September 2022. Two researchers will independently screen the literature, extract data and evaluate the included studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation will be used to assess the degree of certainty of the evidence. Based on the Cochrane Handbook V.5.1.0, the risk of bias assessment of the included randomised controlled trials will be assessed. Based on their randomisation method, allocation generation, concealment, blinding and follow-up, we will assess randomised controlled trials. Random-effects and fixed-effects models and subgroup analyses will be used for meta-analysis. RevMan V.5.4.1 will be used for data collection and meta-analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Due to the nature of this systematic review, ethics approval is not required for this study. We will publish the results of this review in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023411520.
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.