FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2022256522> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2022256522 endingPage "1704" @default.
• W2022256522 startingPage "1696" @default.
• W2022256522 abstract "In 2006, the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG)/the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Taskforce on Quality in Endoscopy published quality indicators for the major gastrointestinal procedures. Our primary aim was to use the published literature to assess current endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) intraprocedural performance and compare it to the targets set by the ACG/ASGE taskforce. Our secondary aim was to determine whether performance varies across different health-care settings (academic and community), study designs (prospective and retrospective), and trainee participation.A PubMed and EMBASE literature search from 1/1/2006 to 2/1/2013 was conducted. Articles were selected based on title, abstract, full text, and reporting of success rates for the intraprocedural quality indicators. Success rates, represented as numerical proportions, were collected from each study. For each success rate, a standard error and a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to weight each study, and a cumulative, weighted success rate (or effect size) for each indicator was determined. Random-effects meta-regression was then used to examine the impact of study setting, design, and trainee involvement on each quality indicator.A total of 8,005 articles were initially retrieved. Following the application of predefined criteria, 52 articles remained. The cumulative, weighted bile duct cannulation success rate was 89.3% (95% CI 0.866-0.919); pancreatic duct cannulation was 85.0% (95% CI 0.813-0.886); precut utilization rate was 10.5% (95% CI 0.087-0.123); common bile duct stone extraction rate was 88.3% (95% CI 0.825-0.941); and the rate of successful biliary stenting below the common bile duct bifurcation was 97.5% (95% CI 0.967-0.984). Subgroup analysis with meta-regression showed no statistically significant differences between academic and community settings, prospective and retrospective study designs, and trainee participation on success across bile duct cannulation, precut utilization, and common bile duct stone extraction (insufficient observations/variance for pancreatic duct cannulation and biliary stent placement).ERCP intraprocedural quality is in good standing. On the basis of this analysis, the two targets that could be potentially revised are precut utilization and biliary stenting. This analysis was confined to the published literature and therefore, in general, reflects the ERCP performance of institutions, primarily academic, that are conducting clinical research. Thus, it is difficult to generalize this performance assessment to the broader ERCP community as a whole." @default.
• W2022256522 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2022256522 creator A5014238491 @default.
• W2022256522 creator A5019204380 @default.
• W2022256522 creator A5033992400 @default.
• W2022256522 creator A5040166748 @default.
• W2022256522 creator A5086466627 @default.
• W2022256522 date "2013-11-01" @default.
• W2022256522 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W2022256522 title "Intraprocedural Quality in Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Meta-Analysis" @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1537490676 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1556458598 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1574734262 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1966276671 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1969379081 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1973851936 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1980808999 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1981477747 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1985469102 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1987017635 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W1996758114 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2006951468 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2007197894 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2012332689 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2025184520 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2026571304 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2030198764 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2030381265 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2042430075 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2043224389 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2046823122 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2050281304 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2058077109 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2073988591 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2075034567 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2080363065 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2082737098 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2082738954 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2082974331 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2084942665 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2086631703 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2086760765 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2087082522 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2092991341 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2094355714 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2110908408 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2111492201 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2113001664 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2129875497 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2154861874 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2170964864 @default.
• W2022256522 cites W2322573029 @default.
• W2022256522 doi "https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2013.217" @default.
• W2022256522 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3840532" @default.
• W2022256522 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23877349" @default.
• W2022256522 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2022256522 type Work @default.
• W2022256522 sameAs 2022256522 @default.
• W2022256522 citedByCount "40" @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222014 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222015 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222016 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222017 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222018 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222019 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222020 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222021 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222022 @default.
• W2022256522 countsByYear W20222565222023 @default.
• W2022256522 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2022256522 hasAuthorship W2022256522A5014238491 @default.
• W2022256522 hasAuthorship W2022256522A5019204380 @default.
• W2022256522 hasAuthorship W2022256522A5033992400 @default.
• W2022256522 hasAuthorship W2022256522A5040166748 @default.
• W2022256522 hasAuthorship W2022256522A5086466627 @default.
• W2022256522 hasBestOaLocation W20222565222 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C151956035 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C2775967933 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C2776884468 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C2778444009 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C2778451229 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C2779777945 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C44249647 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConcept C95190672 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C126322002 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C141071460 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C151956035 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C2775967933 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C2776884468 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C2778444009 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C2778451229 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C2779777945 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C44249647 @default.
• W2022256522 hasConceptScore W2022256522C61434518 @default.

• next