ArticleColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2025
The Songdo consensus: Development of minimum reporting standards for studies of intervention in idiopathic anal fistula using a modified nominal group technique.
Article in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiple consecutive sphincter-preserving procedures improve overall healing outcomes in transsphincteric fistulae: a prospective cohort study of 101 patients.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- The Songdo consensus: Development of minimum reporting standards for studies of intervention in idiopathic anal fistula using a modified nominal group technique.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimCryptoglandular anal fistulas carry a substantial burden to quality of life. Surgery is the only effective curative treatment but requires balancing fistula healing against pain, wounds and continence impairment. Sphincter-preserving procedures do exist but demonstrate variable rates of success. A lack of consistency and precision in outcome reporting and methodological quality hinders effective evidence-based decision-making. We aimed to establish a series of minimum reporting standards for interventional studies in idiopathic anal fistula, to eradicate low-quality studies, thus providing a consistent baseline of useful evidence.
methodsAn international group of 16 experts participated in a modified nominal group technique consensus. The nominal question was: 'What should be the minimum set of reporting standards for studies of intervention in idiopathic anal fistula?' The process was conducted between May and June 2023, culminating in a hybrid in-person/virtual meeting that took place at the Songdo International Proctology Symposium in June 2023.
resultsInitial idea generation resulted in 37 statements within the first round. Themes included variable reporting of follow-up and incontinence. Participants indicated their agreement via a 9-point Likert scale. Any statement achieving >70% consensus was retained. Subsequent group discussion condensed the list to 11 statements for further voting and a final minimum set of 12 reporting standards was created.
conclusionTo date, this is the first study dedicated to developing minimum reporting standards for interventional studies in idiopathic anal fistula using a modified nominal group technique. These standards will instruct researchers in producing meticulous, high-quality studies that are accurate, transparent and reproducible.
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.