Urgency and priority for cardiac surgery: a clinical judgment analysis.

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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Identifying and Understanding the Non-Clinical Impacts of Delayed or Cancelled Surgery in Order to Inform Prioritisation Processes: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
   Article
2. Understanding surgical decision making in early hepatocellular carcinoma.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2011
   Article
3. Provider-hospital "fit" and patient outcomes: evidence from Massachusetts cardiac surgeons, 2002-2004.Health services research · 2011
   Article
4. Opening the "black box" of surgeons' risk estimation: from intuition to quantitative modeling.World journal of surgery · 2008
   Article
5. Decision making in asthma exacerbation: a clinical judgement analysis.Archives of disease in childhood · 2007
   Article
6. A three-phase approach for operating theatre schedules.Health care management science · 2007
   Article
7. Priority setting in cardiac surgery: a survey of decision making and ethical issues.Journal of medical ethics · 2003
   Article
8. Sex inequalities in ischaemic heart disease in primary care. Clinical decision making is not necessarily guided by prejudice.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001
   Article
9. Setting priorities for waiting lists: defining our terms. Steering Committee of the Western Canada Waiting List Project.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2000
   Article
10. Real-time priority scoring system must be used for prioritisation on waiting lists.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1999
    Article
11. Urgency and priority models. Model has limited practical application.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1998
    Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Urgency and priority models. Model has limited practical application.1998
• Commented on by
  Urgency and priority models. Distinction between urgency and priority helps no one.1998
• Commented on by
  Real-time priority scoring system must be used for prioritisation on waiting lists.1999

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as