GuidelineSurgical endoscopy2026
European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee: standard operating procedure.
Guideline in Surgical endoscopy, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) promotes surgical innovation, education, and quality assurance to optimize patient care. A core component of this work is the development of clinical practice guidelines.
methodsWe outline the standard operating procedure for clinical practice guideline development within the EAES. We adhere to standards outlined by the Guidelines International Network (GIN), core Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), and Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation for guidelines of surgical interventions (AGREE-S). PROCESS: For all guidelines, the panel prioritizes outcomes and establishes decision thresholds for each PICO by converting utility values to absolute effect difference thresholds. Next, the systematic review group performs a comprehensive systematic review followed by a meta-analysis and/or network meta-analysis including rating of the certainty of evidence in line with core GRADE. An interdisciplinary panel of interest holders including patient partners then reviews this evidence using summary of findings tables and develops recommendations using the GRADE evidence-to-decision framework under the guidance of a guideline methodologist.
conclusionEAES develops clinical practice guidelines according to the highest methodological standards to summarize evidence and provide health recommendations for a wide range of interest holders including clinicians, patients, researchers, and policymakers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42675299What 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.