reviewTop 10% cited
Meta‐Analysis Comparison of Open Versus Percutaneous Tracheostomy
The Laryngoscope · 2007 · Vol. 117(3) · pp. 447–454
Kevin Higgins✉(Sunnybrook Health Science Centre)Xerxes Punthakee
Abstract
Our meta-analysis illustrates there is no clear difference but a trend toward fewer complications in percutaneous techniques. Percutaneous tracheotomies are more cost-effective and provide greater feasibility in terms of bedside capability and nonsurgical operation.
Tracheal and airway disordersEsophageal and GI PathologyDysphagia Assessment and ManagementMedicinePercutaneousMeta-analysisComplicationSurgeryConfidence intervalOdds ratioRandomized controlled trialSubgroup analysisProspective cohort study
MeSH terms
Cost-Benefit AnalysisHumansPostoperative ComplicationsTracheostomyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeMinimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
Citations
330
FWCI
11.24
field-weighted impact
References
25
Percentile
99%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
References
The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.
Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health · 1998 · 8,165 citations
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
BMJ · 1997 · 55,187 citations
Citation Network
How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.