ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Disparities in access to and outcomes of minimally invasive surgery: a scoping review.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Disparities in access to and outcomes of minimally invasive surgery: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been associated with improved clinical outcomes compared to open surgery for various procedures. However, disparities in access to MIS persist across race/ethnicity, sex, geography, and payor status. This scoping review aims to synthesize existing evidence on disparities in MIS use and outcomes and to highlight key gaps in the literature.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus from 1 January 2020, to 18 October 2024, for US peer-reviewed research on access to and outcomes of MIS in equity-seeking groups. Title/abstracts and full text were independently reviewed, with conflicts resolved by consensus. Information on study characteristics and both clinical and non-clinical outcomes were extracted. Factors associated with adverse clinical outcomes or a lower likelihood of access to MIS were grouped as themes and represented by surgical specialty using a bubble plot. A protocol for this review was pre-registered on Open Science Framework and updated through the course of the study.
resultsA total of 88 articles involving 11,647,821 patients were included in the review. The most frequently reported domain of disparity was race/ethnicity (n = 62 papers), and the most frequently analyzed specialty was general surgery (n = 41 papers). Overall, a decrease in likelihood of MIS was reported among patients who were Black, Hispanic or Native American, uninsured or on Medicaid, from lower socioeconomic status (SES), and those in rural locations. Adverse clinical outcomes of MIS, such as readmissions and complications, were associated with patients who were Black, female, of lower SES, and on Medicaid. Key gaps in the literature were noted in the investigation of disparities across geography (rurality/urbanicity), language and at the intersection of multiple domains of disparity.
conclusionOur review provides important considerations for understanding the inequities across patient groups in access to and outcomes of MIS.
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.