ArticlePloS one2024
Comparison of the ability of resection versus nonresection surgery to prevent the recurrence of sigmoid volvulus: A protocol of a meta-analysis and systematic review.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBased on clinical research guidelines and clinical practice, patients with sigmoid volvulus (SV) who receive conservative treatment have a greater recurrence rate than patients who do not receive conservative treatment, which is almost without any controversy. Surgical treatment is usually the final treatment for patients with SV. However, there are multiple surgical methods for the treatment of SV, which can be roughly divided into resection and nonresection methods. The available evidence on the effectiveness of surgery for preventing postoperative recurrence is still inadequate. Therefore, we drafted this systematic review protocol with meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of these two major types of surgery on preventing the recurrence of SV.
methodsWe comprehensively and systematically reviewed the PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases of articles on SV from inception to November 16, 2023. Two independent authors will screen and analyze the detected literature, and disputes will be resolved through communication with a third experienced person. After evaluating the quality of the literature and estimating the risk of bias, we calculate the pooled effect size and 95% confidence interval. Heterogeneity is analyzed by subgroup analysis, and sensitivity analysis can be carried out to assure the reliability of the results. Finally, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) will be used to evaluate the strength of the evidence. The results of each analysis will be recorded in detail. The whole process was carried out in strict accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines (PRISMA-P).
trial registrationProtocol registration: The study protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews platform (PROSPERO) (CRD42024508350). Protocol version 1.0, 13 Feb 2024.
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.