ArticleAnnals of burns and fire disasters2020
Article in Annals of burns and fire disasters, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with epilepsy are a high-risk population for severe burns. A retrospective study was conducted to assess burns during epileptic seizure in epileptic patients. The study was conducted in a 20- bed burn ICU in Tunis over the period 01/01/2011 to 30/06/2019. Fifty cases combining burns and epilepsy were reviewed. Twenty patients (11 women and 9 men, sex-ratio 0.6) suffering a burn following an epileptic seizure were included. The average age was 46. Epileptic disease was uncontrolled in 75% of our patients and 35% were not receiving any antiepileptic treatment. Burns were related to domestic accident in 95% of cases, 2/3 of which were related to a fall on a brazier. Lesions were deep in 70% of cases, requiring excision of necrotic tissue. Only two patients benefited from a dermal-epidermal graft. Amputation was necessary in 5 patients. Mortality was 25%, related to refractory septic shock.
Identifiers
33708017PMC7894848W3135218881What 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.