Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25126474›Full record

ArticleAdvances in wound care2014

What Do Patients Want? Patient Preference in Wound Care.

Lisa Q Corbett, William J Ennis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in wound care, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane allografts for myelomeningocele and wound reconstruction.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. On the Cutting Edge: Wound Care for the Endovascular Specialist.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2018
    Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lisa Q CorbettWound Healing/Surgery, Hartford Hospital/Hartford Healthcare, Inc. , Hartford, Connecticut.
William J EnnisClinical Surgery, Section Wound Healing and Tissue Repair, University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System , Chicago, Illinois.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient preferences are statements made or actions taken by consumers that reflect their desirability of a range of health options. The concept occupies an increasingly prominent place at the center of healthcare reform, and is connected to all aspects of healthcare, including discovery, research, delivery, outcome, and payment. Patient preference research has focused on shared decisions, decisional aids, and clinical practice guideline development, with limited study in acute and chronic wound care populations. The wound care community has focused primarily on patient focused symptoms and quality of life measurement. With increasing recognition of wound care as a medical specialty and as a public health concern that consumes extensive resources, attention to the preferences of end-users with wounds is necessary. This article will provide an overview of related patient-centered concepts and begin to establish a framework for consideration of patient preference in wound care.

Identifiers

PMID25126474
PMCPMC4121048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.