Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30191655›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2019

Swedish translation and validation of the international skin tear advisory panel skin tear classification system.

Ulrika Källman, Le Blanc Kimberly, Carina Bååth

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Ulrika KällmanResearch and Development Department, South Älvsborg Hospital, Borås, Sweden.
Le Blanc KimberlyKDS Professional Consulting, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Carina BååthDepartment of Health Science, Karlstad University & County Concil, Värmland, Sweden.

Funding

Research Council Södra Älvsborg, Borås, Sweden VGFOUSA-674471
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aims of this study were to translate the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel (ISTAP) classification system for skin tears into Swedish and to validate the translated system. The research process consisted of two phases. Phase I involved the translation of the classification system, using the forward-back translation method, and a consensus survey. The survey dictated that the best Swedish translation for "skin tear" was "hudfliksskada." In Phase 2, the classification system was validated by health care professionals attending a wound care conference held in the spring of 2017 in Sweden. Thirty photographs representing three types of skin tear were presented to participants in random order. Participants were directed to classify the skin tear types in a data collection sheet. The results indicated a moderate level of agreement on classification of skin tears by type. Achieving moderate agreement for the ISTAP skin tear tool is an important milestone as it demonstrates the validity and reliability of the tool. Skin tear classification typing is a complex skill that requires training and time to develop. More education is required for all health care specialists on the classification of skin tears.

Indexed as

HumansLacerationsPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSkinSwedenTranslationsclassification systemskin tearsvalidation

Identifiers

PMID30191655
PMCPMC7948659

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.