ArticleBMJ open2024
Financial burden of complications following lung resection: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGlobal healthcare expenditures are rising, driven largely by increased spending in both high- and low-income countries with hospitalisation as a primary contributor. Respiratory diseases, particularly lung cancer, pose significant public health and economic challenges with thoracic surgery as the standard curative treatment. Complications post resection, such as arrhythmias, infections and respiratory failure, result in substantial healthcare costs and resource demands. Although studies have explored the economic impact of surgeries, there is a limited comprehensive analysis of the financial burden of postoperative complications after lung resection surgery. To address this gap, this scoping review aims to map existing literature on lung resection complications and associated costs, providing insights for future research and healthcare policy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be conducting according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews standards. Eligible peer-reviewed articles and grey literature will be identified across Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica Database and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Cost data will be converted into US dollars as per the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis and adjusted for inflation as per the US Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index inflation calculator. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was not required. The results will be communicated through established professional networks, conference presentations and publication in peer-reviewed journals.
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.