Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29563126›Full record

ArticleBMJ case reports2018

Self-harm scar revision.

Nicholas Parkhouse, Isabella Joy de Vere Hunt

Open access · bronzeAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ case reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 97% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Self-mutilation: a systematic review.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2025
    Pooled it
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicholas ParkhouseDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The McIndoe Centre, East Grinstead, RH19 3EB, UK.
Isabella Joy de Vere HuntMedical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Queen Victoria Hospital · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This report discusses in detail the case of a patient who underwent a scar revision procedure to have her characteristic self-harm scars altered. A detailed insight into the patient's perspective was gained through semistructured interviews conducted at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. The interviews found that an equally if not more conspicuous scar that was distinct from those created from self-harm had a pronounced psychological benefit for the patient. This article calls for more active management of the psychological sequelae of self-harm scars, with the need to facilitate access to surgical treatment in certain cases.

Indexed as

AdultCicatrixFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInterview, PsychologicalPlastic Surgery ProceduresSelf-Injurious BehaviorTreatment Outcomeplastic and reconstructive surgerypsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID29563126
PMCPMC5878410
OpenAlexW2794183461

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.