ArticleSystematic reviews2016
Protocol for the systematic review of the prevention, treatment and public health management of impetigo, scabies and fungal skin infections in resource-limited settings.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Active case detection methods for crusted scabies and leprosy: A systematic review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Treatment, prevention and public health management of impetigo, scabies, crusted scabies and fungal skin infections in endemic populations: a systematic review.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2019Pooled it
- Health care cost of crusted scabies in Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory, Australia.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2022Article
- The in vitro antibacterial effect of permethrin and formaldehyde on Staphylococcus aureus.MicrobiologyOpen · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImpetigo, scabies, and fungal skin infections disproportionately affect populations in resource-limited settings. Evidence for standard treatment of skin infections predominantly stem from hospital-based studies in high-income countries. The evidence for treatment in resource-limited settings is less clear, as studies in these populations may lack randomisation and control groups for cultural, ethical or economic reasons. Likewise, a synthesis of the evidence for public health control within endemic populations is also lacking. We propose a systematic review of the evidence for the prevention, treatment and public health management of skin infections in resource-limited settings, to inform the development of guidelines for the standardised and streamlined clinical and public health management of skin infections in endemic populations.
methodsThe protocol has been designed in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols statement. All trial designs and analytical observational study designs will be eligible for inclusion. A systematic search of the peer-reviewed literature will include PubMed, Excertpa Medica and Global Health. Grey literature databases will also be systematically searched, and clinical trials registries scanned for future relevant studies. The primary outcome of interest will be the clinical cure or decrease in prevalence of impetigo, scabies, crusted scabies, tinea capitis, tinea corporis or tinea unguium. Two independent reviewers will perform eligibility assessment and data extraction using standardised electronic forms. Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Data will be tabulated and narratively synthesised. We expect there will be insufficient data to conduct meta-analysis. The final body of evidence will be reported against the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation grading system. DISCUSSION: The evidence derived from the systematic review will be used to inform the development of guidelines for the management of skin infections in resource-limited settings. The evidence derived will be intended for use by clinicians, public health practitioners and policy makers in the treatment of skin infections and the development of skin infection control programmes. The review will identify any gaps in the current evidence to provide direction for future research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015029453.
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.