We have located links that may give you full text access.
The Era of the Large Databases: Outcomes After Gastroesophageal Surgery According to NSQIP, NIS, and NCDB Databases. Systematic Literature Review.
Surgical Innovation 2018 August
BACKGROUND: The term big data refers to databases that include large amounts of information used in various areas of knowledge. Currently, there are large databases that allow the evaluation of postoperative evolution, such as the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP), the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) National Inpatient Sample (NIS), and the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The aim of this review was to evaluate the clinical impact of information obtained from these registries regarding gastroesophageal surgery.
METHODS: A systematic review using the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines was performed. The research was carried out using the PubMed database identifying 251 articles. All outcomes related to gastroesophageal surgery were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 34 articles published between January 2007 and July 2017 were included, for a total of 345 697 patients. Studies were analyzed and divided according to the type of surgery and main theme in (1) esophageal surgery and (2) gastric surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: The information provided by these databases is an effective way to obtain levels of evidence not obtainable by conventional methods. Furthermore, this information is useful for the external validation of previous studies, to establish benchmarks that allow comparisons between centers and have a positive impact on the quality of care.
METHODS: A systematic review using the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines was performed. The research was carried out using the PubMed database identifying 251 articles. All outcomes related to gastroesophageal surgery were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 34 articles published between January 2007 and July 2017 were included, for a total of 345 697 patients. Studies were analyzed and divided according to the type of surgery and main theme in (1) esophageal surgery and (2) gastric surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: The information provided by these databases is an effective way to obtain levels of evidence not obtainable by conventional methods. Furthermore, this information is useful for the external validation of previous studies, to establish benchmarks that allow comparisons between centers and have a positive impact on the quality of care.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app