Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30259680›Full record

SynthesisInternational wound journal2019

Chronic wounds in Australia: A systematic review of key epidemiological and clinical parameters.

Laura McCosker, Ruth Tulleners, Qinglu Cheng, Stefan Rohmer, Tamzin Pacella, Nick Graves, Rosana Pacella

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 40 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Laura McCoskerAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI), School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9107-9401
Ruth TullenersAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI), School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.
Qinglu ChengAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI), School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.
Stefan RohmerAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI), School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.
Tamzin PacellaAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI), School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.
Nick GravesAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI), School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia.
Rosana PacellaUniversity of Chichester, Chichester, West Sussex, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9742-1957

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chronic wounds are a significant problem in Australia. The health care-related costs of chronic wounds in Australia are considerable, equivalent to more than AUD $3.5 billion, approximately 2% of national health care expenditure. Chronic wounds can also have a significant negative impact on the health-related quality of life of affected individuals. Studies have demonstrated that evidence-based care for chronic wounds improves clinical outcomes. Decision analytical modelling is important in confirming and applying these findings in the Australian context. Epidemiological and clinical data on chronic wounds are required to populate decision analytical models. Although epidemiological and clinical data on chronic wounds in Australia are available, these data have yet to be systematically summarised. To address these omissions and clarify the state of existing evidence, we conducted a systematic review of the literature on key epidemiological and clinical parameters of chronic wounds in Australia. A total of 90 studies were selected for inclusion. This paper presents a synthesis of the evidence on the prevalence and incidence of chronic wounds in Australia, as well as rates of infection, hospitalisation, amputation, healing, and recurrence.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaChronic DiseaseFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceWounds and InjuriesAustraliachronic woundsincidenceprevalencesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30259680
PMCPMC7948920

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.