ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
When Benchmarks Fail Us: A Case Study in Cytoreductive Surgery.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRelative Value Units (RVUs) are utilized to measure physician work effort and create national benchmarks. Physicians are often measured against national benchmarks to determine compensation. Using a case study in cytoreductive surgery, we explored variability in coding that can impact national benchmarks.
methodsA survey was conducted amongst surgeons in the peritoneal surface malignancies consortium (PSM). Data was collected on clinical experience, clinical full time equivalent, wRVUS and institutional coding practice.
resultsCoding of the same procedure resulted in significantly varying RVUs (IQR 60-101) across institutions. Higher volume (> 50% practice) appeared to have better coding practices with higher wRVU/case (Median 102 vs 62, p = 0.04).
conclusionsThere is significant variability in the measurement of similar effort across institutions due to coding variability. Such variability creates flaws in measurement necessary for benchmarks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39460818What 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.