Advanced search
1 file | 322.79 KB Add to list

Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair: results of a consensus meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012

(2013) HERNIA. 17(4). p.423-433
Author
Organization
Abstract
The literature dealing with abdominal wall surgery is often flawed due to lack of adherence to accepted reporting standards and statistical methodology. The EuraHS Working Group (European Registry of Abdominal Wall Hernias) organised a consensus meeting of surgical experts and researchers with an interest in abdominal wall surgery, including a statistician, the editors of the journal Hernia and scientists experienced in meta-analysis. Detailed discussions took place to identify the basic ground rules necessary to improve the quality of research reports related to abdominal wall reconstruction. A list of recommendations was formulated including more general issues on the scientific methodology and statistical approach. Standards and statements are available, each depending on the type of study that is being reported: the CONSORT statement for the Randomised Controlled Trials, the TREND statement for non randomised interventional studies, the STROBE statement for observational studies, the STARLITE statement for literature searches, the MOOSE statement for metaanalyses of observational studies and the PRISMA statement for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A number of recommendations were made, including the use of previously published standard definitions and classifications relating to hernia variables and treatment; the use of the validated Clavien-Dindo classification to report complications in hernia surgery; the use of "time-to-event analysis" to report data on "freedom-of-recurrence" rather than the use of recurrence rates, because it is more sensitive and accounts for the patients that are lost to follow-up compared with other reporting methods. A set of recommendations for reporting outcome results of abdominal wall surgery was formulated as guidance for researchers. It is anticipated that the use of these recommendations will increase the quality and meaning of abdominal wall surgery research.
Keywords
Research, Hernia repair, Abdominal wall, VENTRAL HERNIA REPAIR, Recurrence, Reporting standards, PROPOSAL, STATEMENT, GUIDELINES, EPIDEMIOLOGY, RANDOMIZED-TRIAL, COMPLICATIONS, CLASSIFICATION

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 322.79 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Muysoms, Filip, EB Deerenberg, E Peeters, et al. “Recommendations for Reporting Outcome Results in Abdominal Wall Repair: Results of a Consensus Meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012.” HERNIA 17.4 (2013): 423–433. Print.
APA
Muysoms, Filip, Deerenberg, E., Peeters, E., Agresta, F., Berrevoet, F., Campanelli, G., Ceelen, W., et al. (2013). Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair: results of a consensus meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012. HERNIA, 17(4), 423–433.
Chicago author-date
Muysoms, Filip, EB Deerenberg, E Peeters, F Agresta, Frederik Berrevoet, G Campanelli, Wim Ceelen, et al. 2013. “Recommendations for Reporting Outcome Results in Abdominal Wall Repair: Results of a Consensus Meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012.” Hernia 17 (4): 423–433.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Muysoms, Filip, EB Deerenberg, E Peeters, F Agresta, Frederik Berrevoet, G Campanelli, Wim Ceelen, GG Champault, F Corcione, D Cuccurullo, AC DeBeaux, UA Dietz, RJ Fitzgibbons, JF Gillion, R-D Hilgers, J Jeekel, I Kyle-Leinhase, F Köckerling, V Mandala, A Montgomery, S Morales-Conde, RKJ Simmermacher, V Schumpelick, M Śmietański, M Walgenbach, and M Miserez. 2013. “Recommendations for Reporting Outcome Results in Abdominal Wall Repair: Results of a Consensus Meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012.” Hernia 17 (4): 423–433.
Vancouver
1.
Muysoms F, Deerenberg E, Peeters E, Agresta F, Berrevoet F, Campanelli G, et al. Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair: results of a consensus meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012. HERNIA. 2013;17(4):423–33.
IEEE
[1]
F. Muysoms et al., “Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair: results of a consensus meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012,” HERNIA, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 423–433, 2013.
@article{5694896,
  abstract     = {The literature dealing with abdominal wall surgery is often flawed due to lack of adherence to accepted reporting standards and statistical methodology. 
The EuraHS Working Group (European Registry of Abdominal Wall Hernias) organised a consensus meeting of surgical experts and researchers with an interest in abdominal wall surgery, including a statistician, the editors of the journal Hernia and scientists experienced in meta-analysis. Detailed discussions took place to identify the basic ground rules necessary to improve the quality of research reports related to abdominal wall reconstruction. 
A list of recommendations was formulated including more general issues on the scientific methodology and statistical approach. Standards and statements are available, each depending on the type of study that is being reported: the CONSORT statement for the Randomised Controlled Trials, the TREND statement for non randomised interventional studies, the STROBE statement for observational studies, the STARLITE statement for literature searches, the MOOSE statement for metaanalyses of observational studies and the PRISMA statement for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A number of recommendations were made, including the use of previously published standard definitions and classifications relating to hernia variables and treatment; the use of the validated Clavien-Dindo classification to report complications in hernia surgery; the use of "time-to-event analysis" to report data on "freedom-of-recurrence" rather than the use of recurrence rates, because it is more sensitive and accounts for the patients that are lost to follow-up compared with other reporting methods. 
A set of recommendations for reporting outcome results of abdominal wall surgery was formulated as guidance for researchers. It is anticipated that the use of these recommendations will increase the quality and meaning of abdominal wall surgery research.},
  author       = {Muysoms, Filip and Deerenberg, EB and Peeters, E and Agresta, F and Berrevoet, Frederik and Campanelli, G and Ceelen, Wim and Champault, GG and Corcione, F and Cuccurullo, D and DeBeaux, AC and Dietz, UA and Fitzgibbons, RJ and Gillion, JF and Hilgers, R-D and Jeekel, J and Kyle-Leinhase, I and Köckerling, F and Mandala, V and Montgomery, A and Morales-Conde, S and Simmermacher, RKJ and Schumpelick, V and Śmietański, M and Walgenbach, M and Miserez, M},
  issn         = {1265-4906},
  journal      = {HERNIA},
  keywords     = {Research,Hernia repair,Abdominal wall,VENTRAL HERNIA REPAIR,Recurrence,Reporting standards,PROPOSAL,STATEMENT,GUIDELINES,EPIDEMIOLOGY,RANDOMIZED-TRIAL,COMPLICATIONS,CLASSIFICATION},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {423--433},
  title        = {Recommendations for reporting outcome results in abdominal wall repair: results of a consensus meeting in Palermo, Italy, 28–30 June 2012},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-013-1108-5},
  volume       = {17},
  year         = {2013},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: