ArticleIndian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2025
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses for cardiothoracic surgeons: part 7 - synthesizing evidence.
Article in Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2025. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are powerful tools within the evidence-based framework, with significant utility in cardiothoracic surgery. Systematic reviews represent the gold standard in evidence synthesis and adhere to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, ensuring a reproducible methodology. They include subtypes such as qualitative and mixed-methods reviews, as well as extrapolations like umbrella reviews. A meta-analysis (plural: meta-analyses) is a statistical technique used to synthesize results from multiple studies, providing a more precise and reliable estimate of an effect size. Together, these approaches help inform clinical practice and shape evidence-based guidelines. However, their findings should be interpreted in light of their limitations.
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.