Prospective evaluation of pin site infections in 39 patients treated with external ring fixation.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Pin Tract Infections in Pediatric Open Long Bone Fractures: Common but Clinically Manageable.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026
   Article
2. Antegrade Intramedullary Femoral Lengthening and Distal Temporary Hemiepiphysiodesis for Combined Correction of Leg Length Discrepancy and Coronal Angular Deformity in Skeletally Immature Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
   Article
3. Limb reconstruction in a resource-limited environment.SICOT-J · 2021
   Article
4. Clinical Outcome following Management of Severe Osteomyelitis due to Pin Site Infection.Strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction
   Article

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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.