ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2010
Do pressure ulcer risk assessment scales improve clinical practice?
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Internal Validation of a Gradient Boosting Model for Pressure Injury Risk in the ICU.International wound journal · 2026Article
- The Role of EuroSCORE II in Predicting Postoperative Pressure Injuries in Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Inflammatory biomarkers in sebum for identifying skin damage in patients with a Stage I pressure ulcer in the pelvic region: A single centre observational, longitudinal cohort study with elderly patients.International wound journal · 2023Observational
- Nursing Assessment of Pressure Injury Risk with the Braden Scale Validated against Sensor-Based Measurement of Movement.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The biomechanical efficacy of a hydrogel-based dressing in preventing facial medical device-related pressure ulcers.International wound journal · 2022Article
- Dynamic Risk Prediction for Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injury in Adult Critical Care Patients.Critical care explorations · 2021Article
- Authors' response to comment on "International consensus on pressure injury preventative interventions by risk level for critically ill patients: A modified Delphi study".International wound journal · 2021Article
- Comment on "International consensus on pressure injury preventative interventions by risk level for critically ill patients: A modified Delphi study".International wound journal · 2021Article
- Searching for Programme theories for a realist evaluation: a case study comparing an academic database search and a simple Google search.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- A blinded clinical study using a subepidermal moisture biocapacitance measurement device for early detection of pressure injuries.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society · 2020Article
- Using the Braden subscales to assess risk of pressure injuries in adult patients: A retrospective case-control study.International wound journal · 2019Article
- Two-Hourly Repositioning for Prevention of Pressure Ulcers in the Elderly: Patient Safety or Elder Abuse?Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2019Article
- Predictive accuracy of the Braden Q Scale in risk assessment for paediatric pressure ulcer: A meta-analysis.International journal of nursing sciences · 2018Review
- Clinical evaluation of a new pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument, the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T).Journal of advanced nursing · 2018Article
- Nursing documentation of pressure ulcers in nursing homes: comparison of record content and patient examinations.Nursing open · 2016Article
- Developing a pressure ulcer risk factor minimum data set and risk assessment framework.Journal of advanced nursing · 2014Article
- Evaluation of the pressure ulcers risk scales with critically ill patients: a prospective cohort study.Revista latino-americana de enfermagemArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Standardized assessment instruments are deemed important for estimating pressure ulcer risk. Today, more than 40 so-called pressure ulcer risk assessment scales are available but still there is an ongoing debate about their usefulness. From a measurement point of view pressure ulcer (PU) risk assessment scales have serious limitations. Empirical evidence supporting the validity of PU risk assessment scale scores is weak and obtained scores contain varying amounts of measurement error. The concept of pressure ulcer risk is strongly related to the general health status and severity of illness. A clinical impact due do the application of these scales could also not be demonstrated. It is questionable whether completion of standardized pressure ulcer risk scales in clinical practice is really needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.