ArticleFrontiers in urology2026
Current views on sustainability in urology: findings from the North Central Section of American Urological Association membership survey.
Article in Frontiers in urology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The United Nations defines sustainability as meeting needs of the present without compromising future generations. While often equated to "saving the planet", sustainability is a diverse topic. Healthcare generates >5% of CO Methods: Following literature review on sustainability in surgery/urology, a 19-item anonymous REDCap survey was developed and distributed via email to NCSAUA members (N = 1607). The survey assessed current best practice, institutional/personal sustainability, and demographics. Responses were compiled and summarized using descriptive statistics. Results: Survey response rate was 4.9% (79/1607). Respondents were most commonly from metropolitan areas (82%), male (71%), and in practice for 5-14 years (29%). Sustainability topics were prioritized as: (1) financial, (2) future workforce, (3) environmental. Over half (56%) reported no institutional sustainability programs or were unaware of them. Instrument (67%), computer (68%), and paper (65%) recycling were supported by a majority of respondents. However, only 28% and 29% of respondents reported current institutional use of instrument and computer recycling, respectively. Telemedicine was infrequent, with most urologists (58%) conducting 0-5% of visits virtually. Conclusions: Current institutional and urologic practice emphasis on sustainability is low. Respondents ranked highest sustainability priorities as financial and future workforce. Efforts to address environmental sustainability were also supported, namely reduction of disposables and waste. The findings support the development of targeted programs to advance sustainability priorities widely.
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.