SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2025
An optimal curriculum for training in endoscopic ultrasound: a summarized evidence-based literature systematic review.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Directed Transgastric Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (EDGE): Techniques, Outcomes and Safety Profiles.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesEndoscopic ultrasound (EUS) training is strongly correlated with procedure quality and improved patient outcomes. However, EUS fellowship curricula and the environment in which training should take place are not well defined. A well-structured training curriculum should aim to establish a universally accepted competence framework before endosonographers are allowed to start independent practice. This systematic review seeks to identify the essential components of an EUS training curriculum, determine the optimal environment for this training, and highlight gaps and inconsistencies in current guidelines. MATERIAL AND
methodsA comprehensive literature review was performed using different databases (PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane library, Directory of Open Access Journals, and Google Scholar) using Mesh methodology for keyword search in the field of EUS training and following PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were review articles, original research articles, international societal guidelines, book chapters, and expert consensus addressing EUS educational aspects published in the last two decades (January 2002-August 2023) in peer-reviewed journals in English.
resultsA total of 49 papers were included according to the inclusion criteria in the 20-year period range, from which 31 assessed diagnostic EUS curricula content and 19 any aspect of the therapeutic EUS curricula. The requisites, duration, and/or competence demonstration strategies were addressed in 28 publications, whereas 15 referred to the adequate environment for EUS training. Overall, there was a consensus on the need for a structured, formal EUS curriculum along with standardized and properly supervised training and assessment to ensure competence.
conclusionThe establishment of a structured EUS fellowship curricula should aim to produce competent practitioners, thereby ensuring safe and effective patient-care, uniformly and at the international level. While there is general agreement in the literature on the major aspects of a training curriculum, which we synthesize here, the ideal EUS training context deserves further study and better definition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40410620What 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.