
Abstract Background Systematic reviews are an important tool of evidence-based surgery. Surgical systematic reviews and trials, however, require a special methodological approach. Purpose This article provides recommendations for conducting state-of-the-art systematic reviews in surgery with or without meta-analysis. Conclusions For systematic reviews in surgery, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) should be searched. Critical appraisal is at the core of every surgical systematic review, with information on blinding, industry involvement, surgical experience, and standardisation of surgical technique holding special importance. Due to clinical heterogeneity among surgical trials, the random-effects model should be used as a default. In the experience of the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery, adherence to these recommendations yields high-quality surgical systematic reviews.
Surgical Procedures, Operative, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Humans, Review Article, Societies, Medical [MeSH] ; Systematic Reviews as Topic [MeSH] ; Humans [MeSH] ; Systematic review ; Synoptic evidence ; Practice Guidelines as Topic [MeSH] ; Review Article ; Meta-analysis ; Surgery ; Evidence-based medicine ; Surgical Procedures, Operative [MeSH], Societies, Medical, Systematic Reviews as Topic
Surgical Procedures, Operative, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Humans, Review Article, Societies, Medical [MeSH] ; Systematic Reviews as Topic [MeSH] ; Humans [MeSH] ; Systematic review ; Synoptic evidence ; Practice Guidelines as Topic [MeSH] ; Review Article ; Meta-analysis ; Surgery ; Evidence-based medicine ; Surgical Procedures, Operative [MeSH], Societies, Medical, Systematic Reviews as Topic
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 67 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
