ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
The dissemination of surgical clinical practice guidelines-evaluating SAGES' strategies for distribution.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- Clinical Practice Guidelines in Surgical Malpractice Litigation: An Analysis of California Trial Court Orders.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Society of Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) has been a leader in the development of surgical clinical practice guidelines; however, the dissemination and implementation of these remains a challenge. We aim to analyze the user interaction with the SAGES website (sages.org) guidelines' page and guideline downloads from their associated journal Surgical Endoscopy to help inform the organization about its distribution and dissemination methods.
methodsGoogle analytics from the sages.org website and Surgical Endoscopy downloads for each guideline were obtained from July 2023 to April 2024, as well as number of downloads for the lifetime of the guideline. Data were organized by overall guideline popularity, defined as number of sages.org views or number of journal downloads, and its associated citations. Popularity by country was only informed by google analytics data from sages.org. The country's associated economic status-high, upper middle, lower middle, and low-income was obtained and a chi-squared test, applied to proportions, was performed on each guideline to determine if the economic status of the country significantly influences guideline popularity (p-value less than 0.05, confidence interval 95%).
resultsThe hiatal hernia guideline had the most sages.org views and citations over the 9-month period; however, the management of diverticulitis guideline had the most journal downloads from time of publication. Colorectal surgery (CRS) guidelines were the most popular category in journal downloads which was not observed in sages.org views. Additionally, the popularity significantly differed in four guidelines based on the country's economic status.
conclusionsSociety websites and journals were found to be reasonable platforms for dissemination of guidelines, with viewership and download numbers in the tens of thousands for some articles. The variability in engagement across platforms may suggest different audiences with different needs. The data emphasizes the importance of SAGES diversifying their platforms for broader dissemination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40355741What 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.