ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2024
Research prioritization in hernia surgery: a modified Delphi ACHQC and VHOC expert consensus.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07461558 (WATCH IT TRIAL WAtchful Waiting Versus immediaTe Repair for Occult Contralateral Hernias Found During MIS Inguinal Hernia Repair Trial.), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
WATCH IT TRIAL WAtchful Waiting Versus immediaTe Repair for Occult Contralateral Hernias Found During MIS Inguinal Hernia Repair Trial.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning in ventral hernia imaging: automated multi-structure CT segmentation for surgical planning.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Article
- Quality of life outcomes of minimally invasive repair of occult contralateral inguinal hernias: an ACHQC analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNumerous clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements have been published in hernia surgery, however, there is still a need for high-quality evidence to address remaining unanswered questions. The aim of this study was to conduct research priority setting through a modified Delphi process to identify a list of top research priorities in hernia surgery.
methodsA structured literature review of clinical practice guidelines was performed by the steering committee. Topics considered clinically significant, practical to study and lacking strong evidence were extracted and refined into a comprehensive list, then entered into a two-round Delphi survey for prioritization at the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) Quality Improvement Summit. In round 1, participants were instructed to select any topic that should be prioritized for future research. Topics were ranked according to the proportion of votes and the 25 highest-ranking topics were included in the second round. In round 2, participants were instructed to select only the top 10 topics for research prioritization.
resultsEleven clinical practice guidelines were reviewed. Eighty-seven topics were extracted by the steering committee and submitted for prioritization. After the first round, 25 of the highest-ranking topics were determined and included in the second round. A final list of 11 research questions was identified. The hernia types with the most research interest were inguinal and epigastric/umbilical hernias. Other topics of high interest were the management of diastasis recti, primary versus mesh repairs and expectant management versus surgical repair.
conclusionOur study provides a research agenda generated through expert consensus that may be used in the prioritization of the design and funding of clinical trials in hernia surgery.
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.