ArticleThe Indian journal of surgery2017
Wound Outcome Following Primary and Delayed Primary Skin Closure Techniques After Laparotomy for Non-Traumatic Ileal Perforation: a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in The Indian journal of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Delayed primary skin closure reduce surgical site infection following surgery for gastrointestinal perforation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Practical Review on Delayed Primary Closure: Basic Science and Clinical Applications.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To study the effect of primary and delayed primary closure of skin incision on wound outcome in patients with non-traumatic ileal perforation, 68 patients of ileal perforation were studied in a prospective randomized clinical trial. Patients fulfilling inclusion criteria were divided into ileostomy and non-ileostomy groups, both of which were then randomized into two subgroups each depending on whether skin was closed primarily or in a delayed primary manner. Wound infection and dehiscence were the main outcome parameters studied. The data collected was analyzed using appropriate statistical tools taking significant
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.