SynthesisBMC endocrine disorders2022
Effect of electrical stimulation on patients with diabetes-related ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC endocrine disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation Therapy in the Treatment of Chronic Wounds: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Economic Analysis.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Review
- Electroactive Electrospun Nanofibrous Scaffolds: Innovative Approaches for Improved Skin Wound Healing.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Effects of low-frequency pulsed electrical stimulation at the common peroneal nerve on chronic refractory wounds of the lower limb: A randomized controlled trial.Health science reports · 2024Article
- The Fragility of Landmark Randomized Controlled Trials in the Plastic Surgery Literature.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- The Potential of Electrical Stimulation and Smart Textiles for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus.Hormone and metabolic research = Hormon- und Stoffwechselforschung = Hormones et metabolisme · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to systematically review the literature to better understand the efficacy of electrical stimulation (ES) for the treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers.
methodsWe searched the Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases through July 31, 2021. Original trials for ES treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers with placebo or standard care as the control group were included. The primary outcomes were ulcer area reduction and healing rates. Meta-analyses were performed to compare the standardized mean difference (SMD) in the percentage of ulcer reduction and risk ratio of non-healing rates between ES treatment and placebo or standard care. We used the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials to assess the risk of bias for each included article. Funnel plots and Egger's test were used to assess publication bias.
resultsCompared to placebo or standard care, ES had a significant benefit for the treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers in terms of percentage of ulcer reduction (SMD = 2.56, 95% CI: 1.43-3.69; P < 0.001 (Q-test), I
conclusionsBased on the findings of this meta-analysis, ES could be used to treat patients with diabetes-related ulcers. ES treatment was effective for ulcer area reduction and ulcer healing, although it had a high heterogeneity level among the included studies. Pulsed current ES has the potential benefit of increasing ulcer healing compared to direct current ES. Further large-scale clinical trials are needed to define the adverse events and potentiators of ES in the treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers.
Indexed as
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.