Literature DB >> 18386768

Caveats in the interpretation of the surgical literature.

U Guller1.   

Abstract

The ability to appraise research literature critically is an invaluable tool in the era of evidence-based medicine. The objective of this educational article is to highlight certain caveats that are important to those who seek to interpret the surgical literature. These caveats are illustrated with intuitive examples drawn from the field of surgery. It is hoped that the article will help surgeons to recognize the common pitfalls encountered when interpreting scientific reports. This is important if research findings are to be transferred appropriately into the realm of clinical practice. British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18386768     DOI: 10.1002/bjs.6156

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  7 in total

1.  Improving treatment decisions from radiographs: effect of a decision aid.

Authors:  Philip Anthony Mileman; Wilbert B van den Hout
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2009-05-13       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  The chicken-and-egg debate about statistics and research.

Authors:  Luca Bertolaccini; Andrea Viti; Alberto Terzi
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Bilateral total extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair (TEP) has outcomes similar to those for unilateral TEP: population-based analysis of prospective data of 6,505 patients.

Authors:  Markus Gass; Laura Rosella; Vanessa Banz; Daniel Candinas; Ulrich Güller
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-11-24       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Tissue banking in a regional hospital: a promising future concept? First report on fresh frozen tissue banking in a hospital without an integrated institute of pathology.

Authors:  Marco von Strauss und Torney; Ulrich Güller; Farid Rezaeian; Philippe Brosi; Luigi Terracciano; Markus Zuber
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Critical appraisal of meta-analyses: an introductory guide for the practicing surgeon.

Authors:  Nathan Lawrentschuk; Jonathan McCall; Ulrich Güller
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2009-07-22

Review 6.  Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer: a review of meta-analyses.

Authors:  Bas P L Wijnhoven; Jan J B van Lanschot; Hugo W Tilanus; Ewout W Steyerberg; Ate van der Gaast
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 7.  Systematic reviews in surgery-recommendations from the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery.

Authors:  Eva Kalkum; Rosa Klotz; Svenja Seide; Felix J Hüttner; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Felix Nickel; Elias Khajeh; Phillip Knebel; Markus K Diener; Pascal Probst
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 3.445

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.