Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia for transabdominal robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery

This is not the most recent version

Information

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011387Copy DOI
Database:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Version published:
  1. 02 December 2014see what's new
Type:
  1. Intervention
Stage:
  1. Protocol
Cochrane Editorial Group:
  1. Cochrane Anaesthesia Group

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2014 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Article metrics

Altmetric:

Cited by:

Cited 0 times via Crossref Cited-by Linking

Collapse

Authors

  • Suzanne F Herling

    Correspondence to: Department of Anaesthesiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Herlev, Denmark

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

  • Bjørn Dreijer

    Department of Anaesthesiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Herlev, Herlev, Denmark

  • Thordis Thomsen

    Abdominal Centre, 3133, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark

  • Ann Merete Møller

    The Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group, Rigshospitalet & Department of Anaesthesiology, University of Copenhagen Herlev Hospital, Herlev, Denmark

Contributions of authors

Suzanne F Herling (SH), Bjørn Dreijer (BD), Thordis Thomsen (TT), Ann Merete Møller (AM)

Conceiving the review: SH, BD, TT and AM

Co‐ordinating the review: SH

Undertaking manual searches: SH and BD

Screening search results: SH and BD

Organizing retrieval of papers: SH

Screening retrieved papers against inclusion criteria: SH and BD

Appraising quality of papers: SH, BD, AM

Abstracting data from papers: SH and BD

Writing to authors of papers for additional information: SH and BD

Providing additional data about papers: SH and BD

Obtaining and screening data on unpublished studies: SH and BD

Data management for the review: SH

Entering data into Review Manager (RevMan 5.2): SH

RevMan statistical data: SH

Other statistical analysis not using RevMan: SH

Interpretation of data: SH, BD, TT and AM

Statistical inferences: SH

Writing the review: SH, BD, TT and AM

Securing funding for the review: AM

Performing previous work that was the foundation of the present study: none of the authors in this review

Guarantor for the review (one author): AM

Person responsible for reading and checking review before submission: SH, BD, TT and AM

Declarations of interest

Suzanne F Herling: none known

Bjørn Dreijer: none known

Thordis Thomsen: none known

Ann Merete Møller: none known

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Rodrigo Cavallazzi (content editor), Nathan Pace (statistical editor), Daniel M Gainsburg, Hamdy Awad and André Börgers (peer reviewers) for their help and editorial advice during the preparation of this protocol for the systematic review.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2017 Apr 04

Total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia for adults undergoing transabdominal robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery

Review

Suzanne Forsyth Herling, Bjørn Dreijer, Gitte Wrist Lam, Thordis Thomsen, Ann Merete Møller

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011387.pub2

2014 Dec 02

Total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia for transabdominal robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery

Protocol

Suzanne F Herling, Bjørn Dreijer, Thordis Thomsen, Ann Merete Møller

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011387

Keywords

MeSH

PICOs

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

The PICO model is widely used and taught in evidence-based health care as a strategy for formulating questions and search strategies and for characterizing clinical studies or meta-analyses. PICO stands for four different potential components of a clinical question: Patient, Population or Problem; Intervention; Comparison; Outcome.

See more on using PICO in the Cochrane Handbook.