ReviewNursing open2020
Development of nursing care guideline for burned hands.
Review in Nursing open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Amelioration of psoriasis-like skin lesions by human amniotic mesenchymal stem cells: insights from multiomics profiling in mice.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Nursing care directed to burned patients: a scoping review.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2023Article
- Development of nursing care guideline for burned hands.Nursing open · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To develop an evidence-based guideline to care for hand-burned patients. Design: An integrative review. Method: The search was conducted of EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Clinical Key, Iranmedex, Magiran, Scientific Information Database (SID), Cochran, CINAHL and Google Scholar databases from January 2000-August 2019. Following the formation of the research team, two researchers independently selected the eligible studies. The initial search resulted in 2,230 records; ultimately, 40 articles were identified to be the review after screening the records based on the study's inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality of selected studies was evaluated with the MMAT method. Results: Data syntheses of selected studies, coded by highlighting the relevant parts of the text, and assigning code words to these areas were done. Following this, a constant comparison was used to develop categories by combining codes. Finally, hand burns nursing care guideline was developed by categorizing descriptive themes in two main phases. Conclusion: This review results have shown that evidence-based guidelines present high-quality recommendations for the healthcare team, which improves the quality of clinical care. Due to a lack of established guidelines in our context, it seems to be helpful to use evidence-based guidelines in managing burned hands.
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.