English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Phase 3 randomized controlled trials are the widely accepted gold standard through which treatment decisions are made, as they assess the efficacy of a novel treatment against the control on the relevant patient population. The effectiveness of the novel treatment should be derived by measuring patient-important outcomes; however, to accurately assess these outcomes, clinical trials often require extensive patient follow-up and large sample sizes that can incur substantial expense. For this reason, investigators substitute surrogate end points to reduce the sample size and duration of a trial, ultimately reducing cost. The purpose of this article is to help surgeons appraise the surgical literature that use surrogate end points for patient-important outcomes.

Users’ guide to the surgical literature: how to assess an article using surrogate end points