ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2026
Early identification of emergency abdominal surgery candidates in the emergency department - a Delphi study.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAcute high-risk abdominal (AHA) surgery is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. In the emergency department (ED), early identification of patients requiring AHA surgery remains challenging and is often based on non-standardized clinical judgment. This study aimed to identify clinical indicators that may support the timely recognition of patients in need of emergency abdominal surgery.
methodsA modified Delphi study was conducted to achieve expert consensus on early clinical indicators of AHA surgery. Two Delphi rounds were performed. In round one, experienced surgeons and emergency clinicians rated 30 predefined indicators as insignificant, less important, important, or very important. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% of participants rating an indicator as important or very important. In round two, participants were asked to rank the importance of the indicators rated as “important” or “very important” in round one.
resultsA total of 87 surgeons and emergency physicians participated in round one, with 62 (71%) completing round two. Consensus was reached for 11 indicators considered important for identifying AHA patients on arrival in the ED, e.g. acute pain onset within minutes, VAS pain score 6–10, repeated vomiting, and absence of bowel movement within 24 h. In round two, clinicians ranked these indicators; however, no clear consensus emerged regarding their relative prioritisation.
conclusionThis Delphi study identified 11 clinically relevant indicators for the early identification of patients requiring AHA surgery in the ED. The study underscores the complexity of early recognition and supports the need for structured, data-informed screening tools to aid clinical decision-making.
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.