Response to the letter to the editor 'Novel imaging methods reveal positive impact of topical negative pressure application on tissue perfusion in an in-vivo skin model'.

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.

1. The Value of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy and Flap Surgery in Hidradenitis Suppurativa - A Single Center Analysis of Different Treatment Options.Frontiers in surgery · 2022
   Article
2. Does indocyanine green fluorescence angiography impact the intraoperative choice of procedure in free vascularized medial femoral condyle grafting for scaphoid nonunions?Frontiers in surgery · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Comment on "Novel imaging methods reveal positive impact of topical negative pressure application on tissue perfusion in an in vivo skin model".2021

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as