MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751644257 · doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.08.583

Early elective versus delayed elective surgery in acute recurrent diverticulitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2017· review· en· W2751644257 on OpenAlex
Rao Muhammad Asaf Khan, Shahin Hajibandeh, Shahab Hajibandeh

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Surgery · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverticular Disease and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiverticulitisMeta-analysisElective surgeryGeneral surgerySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To investigate outcomes of early versus delayed surgery in patients with acute recurrent diverticulitis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement standards. We conducted a search of electronic information sources, including MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry; ClinicalTrials.gov; and ISRCTN Register, and bibliographic reference lists to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating outcomes of early versus delayed surgery in patients with acute recurrent diverticulitis. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale to assess the risk of bias of included studies. Random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data. RESULTS: We identified three retrospective and one prospective cohort studies enrolling a total of 1046 patients. The included patients were comparable in terms of age, ASA score and Hinchey classifications (Hinchey I and II). The results of our analyses suggested that there was no difference between two groups in surgical site infection [Odds ratio (OR) 1.61, 95% CI 0.79-3.27, P = 0.19], intra-abdominal abscess (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.21-4.00, P = 0.91), anastomotic leak (OR1.27, 95% CI 0.50-3.25, P = 0.61), 30-day mortality [Risk difference (RD) 0.00 95% CI -0.01-0.01, P = 0.80], postoperative ileus (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.50-3.66, P = 0.55), postoperative bleeding (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.32-2.69, P = 0.89), ureteric injury (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.08-5.07, P = 0.65), and overall morbidity (OR 1.42 95% CI 0.76-2.66, P = 0.27). The early surgery was associated with longer operative time [Mean Difference (MD) 12.8, 95% CI 5.08-20.53, P = 0.001] and length of stay (MD 4.41, 95% CI -0.34-8.53, P = 0.03). Among those undergoing laparoscopic surgery, conversion to open surgery was higher in the early surgery group (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.36-5.40, P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The best available evidence suggests that there is no difference between early elective and delayed elective surgery for acute recurrent diverticulitis in terms of clinical outcomes. However, longer operative time and length of stay and higher conversion rate to open surgery associated with early elective surgery may make the delayed elective surgery more cost-effective. The best available evidence is derived from non-randomised studies; therefore, high quality randomised controlled trials are required to provide more robust basis for definite conclusions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.235
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it