SynthesisWorld journal of urology2025
Environmental sustainability in urologic practices: a systematic review.
Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- From fossil to bio-circular plastics: the environmental benefits of bio-attributed acrylonitrile butadiene styrene in single-use cystoscopes.BJU international · 2026Article
- [Sustainability in urology: from vision to implementation : Results from a member survey conducted by the German Society of Urology].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Multicentre real-world evaluation of the Haematuria Cancer Risk Score to risk-stratify the detection of bladder cancer in patients referred from primary care.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Pediatric ureteral stenting: state-of-the-art review.World journal of urology · 2026Review
- Current views on sustainability in urology: findings from the North Central Section of American Urological Association membership survey.Frontiers in urology · 2026Article
- Achieving sustainability in urology: a consensus study by the European association of urology (EAU) section office.World journal of urology · 2025Observational
- [Digital health: a green future for healthcare?]Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this systematic review is to assess the environmental impact of urologic procedures and equipment (P), specifically comparing emissions and waste generation between single-use and reusable devices (I and C), while also exploring strategies for emission reduction and providing relevant recommendations for sustainable practices in urology.
methodsThe review registered to PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024576865) and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search was conducted to identify studies addressing sustainability, carbon footprint, and environmental impact in urology. A total of 7714 records were initially identified, of which ten met the inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS scoring system to evaluate risk of bias and applicability concerns.
resultsTen studies met the inclusion criteria, focusing on the environmental impacts of urologic devices and procedures (O). Single-use cystoscopes demonstrated lower carbon dioxide (CO
conclusionA hybrid approach in urology, focusing on improving sterilization processes and developing eco-friendly single-use alternatives, may provide a balanced approach toward sustainability.
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.