Observational studyWorld journal of urology2025
Achieving sustainability in urology: a consensus study by the European association of urology (EAU) section office.
Observational study in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06723574 (Assessing Environmental Sustainability in Urologic Practices), which is not on this 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.
Assessing Environmental Sustainability in Urologic Practices: A Systematic Review
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Sustainability in urology: from vision to implementation : Results from a member survey conducted by the German Society of Urology].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Current views on sustainability in urology: findings from the North Central Section of American Urological Association membership survey.Frontiers in urology · 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
29 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the awareness, attitudes, and practices related to environmental sustainability among urologists and to explore targeted interventions, educational initiatives to enhance sustainability in urological practice while maintaining high standards of patient care.
methodsA focus group defined objectives and methodology. Ethical approval was obtained (NEU IRB: 22425), and the study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06723574). A two-stage approach was adopted: a cross-sectional survey among EAU Section Office and Working Group members to assess sustainability awareness and practices; followed by a single-round structured consensus statement to validate key findings and inform practical recommendations. While referred to as a 'consensus statement' in this manuscript, this process did not follow formal Delphi or multi-round consensus methodology.
resultsA total of 83 out of 390 participants completed the first step survey (21.3% response rate), and 26 of 32 individuals responded to the consensus statement (81.3% response rate). The environmental awareness was reported as 61.5%, with 49.3% considering sustainability in instrument use. Respondents showed importance on implementing environmentally sustainable practices in the operating room, with 83.2% agreement rate. This study's limitations include a restricted sample of participants, potential exclusion of early-career perspectives, single-round consensus limiting depth, and survey length possibly inducing fatigue. Broader, multi-phase research is recommended.
conclusionSustainability in urology appears to be increasingly recognized as an important aspect of high-quality care. Respondents in this cohort emphasized priorities such as improving waste management, adopting reusable instruments where feasible, and incorporating sustainability training into medical education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41240108What 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.