Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33626239›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2021

Reliability and agreement of instrumental skin barrier measurements in clinical pressure ulcer prevention research.

Jan Kottner, Ulrike Blume-Peytavi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jan KottnerCharité Center for Health and Human Sciences, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0750-3818
Ulrike Blume-PeytaviDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEGhent University · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In skin and wound research the instrumental measurement of skin function is established. Despite the widespread use, empirical evidence about measurement errors is widely lacking. The aim of this study was to measure reliability and agreement of skin temperature, transepidermal water loss, epidermal hydration, and erythema at the heel and sacral skin. Four experienced researchers performed skin measurements in 15 subjects. Lowest reliability was observed for transepidermal water loss at the sacral skin (ICC (1) 0.46 (95% CI 0.00-0.78)) and highest for skin temperature at the heel skin (ICC (1) 0.99 (95% CI 0.99-1.00)). Lowest Standard Errors of Measurement were calculated for skin temperature measurements at the heels (0.11°C) and highest for erythema measurements at the sacral skin (26.7 arbitrary units). There was a clear association between variability of estimates and reliability coefficients. Single measurements of skin temperature, stratum corneum, and epidermal hydration at the sacral and heel skin areas can be used in clinical research and practice. Means of at least two measurements should be used for estimating transepidermal water loss and erythema. Evidence is needed to inform researchers about relative and absolute measurement errors of commonly applied instruments and measurements in skin and wound research.

Indexed as

Pressure UlcerEpidermisHumansReproducibility of ResultsSkinSkin CareSkin Physiological PhenomenaEpidermiserythemahydrationreliabilitystratum corneum

Identifiers

PMID33626239
PMCPMC8450794
OpenAlexW3133216146

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.