ArticleInternational wound journal2018
The inter-rater reliability between nurse-assessors clinically assessing infection of chronic wounds using the WUWHS criteria.
Article in International wound journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Signs and Symptoms of Biofilm-Associated Infection in Chronic Wounds: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.International wound journal · 2026Pooled it
- Creation of a National Chronic Wound Registry-Challenges and Opportunities.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Infection assessment tools for acute and chronic wounds: a scoping review.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2025Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the inter-rater reliability between one expert-nurse and four clinical-nurses who were asked to clinically assess infection of chronic wounds by using the World Union of Wound Healing Societies (WUWHS) criteria. A quasi-experimental design was used to collect the data. In comparison to phase 1 in which 'open questions' were asked, in phase 2 a pre-printed form (checklist) was introduced. In both phases, 55 chronic wounds were clinically assessed. For each WUWHS criterion the inter-rater reliability of signs and symptoms was expressed by Cohens Kappa (κ). A substantial agreement (κ ≥ 0·6) was considered as adequate. In both phases pocketing (p < 0·02), and erythema (p < 0·004) scored statistically significant results. Phase 2 showed higher inter-rater agreements compared with phase 1 (three substantial agreements (easily bleeding/friable granulation tissue, delayed healing, increasing exudate), an almost perfect- and a perfect agreement for malodour and pain, respectively. According to the results it can be concluded that the clinical assessment of infection of chronic wounds may be better supported by a pre-printed form than making use of an 'open questions' form. To provide this with a higher level of evidence, there is need for more well conducted studies.
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.