ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2020
Quantifying Inequitable Access to Rapid Burn and Reconstructive Care through Geospatial Mapping.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D Telemedicine Outperforms 2D Telemedicine: A Randomized Crossover Trial in Reconstructive Plastic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2026Trial
- Identifying Hospitals in Nepal for Acute Burn Care and Stabilization Capacity Development: Location-Allocation Modeling for Strategic Service Delivery.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Time-critical pathologies, such as the care of burn-injured patients, rely on accurate travel time data to plan high-quality service provision. Geospatial modeling, using data from the Malaria Atlas Project, together with census data, permits quantification of the huge global discrepancies in temporal access to burn care between high-income and low-resource settings. In this study, focusing on the United Kingdom and Ghana, we found that a 3-fold population difference exists with, respectively, 95.6% and 29.9% of the population that could access specialist burn care within 1-hour travel time. Solutions to such inequalities include upscaling of infrastructure and specialist personnel, but this is aspirational rather than feasible in most low- to middle-income countries. Mixed models of decentralization of care that leverage eHealth strategies, such as telemedicine, may enhance quality of local burns and reconstructive surgical care through skills transfer, capacity building, and expediting of urgent transfers, while empowering local healthcare communities. By extending specialist burn care coverage through eHealth to 8 district hospitals in rural Ghana, we demonstrate the potential to increase specialist population coverage within 1-hour travel time from 29.9% to 45.3%-equivalent to an additional 5.1 million people.
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.