ArticleJournal of oncology2021
Analysis of Factors Causing Skin Damage in the Application of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter in Cancer Patients.
Article in Journal of oncology, 2021. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Preliminary Validation of a Central Venous Access Device-Associated Skin Impairment Classification Tool Using Modified Delphi and Clinimetric Methods.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- Central venous access device terminologies, complications, and reason for removal in oncology: a scoping review.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Observational
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the related factors of skin damage caused by peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) in cancer patients.
methodsIt was a retrospective analysis of 202 cancer patients admitted to our hospital from February 2014 to July 2019. 50 cases of PICC-related skin damage and 152 cases of non-skin damage were studied. In addition, multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine independent risk factors for PICC-related skin damage, including cancer patients with catheter-related skin damage and patients without skin damage.
results50 patients with PICC skin damage (19 males and 31 females) and 152 patients without skin damage (62 males and 90 females) were retrospectively analyzed. The skin damage rate was 24.8%. The analysis of variance results showed that many factors are related to PICC catheter-related skin damage, including hormones (
conclusionThe independent influencing factors of skin damage during PICC catheterization are hormones, BMI, number of days with tube, and chemotherapy cycle.
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.