ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Pressure Ulcers Risk Assessment According to Nursing Criteria.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. 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.
- VALENF-Instrument-Based Nursing Assessment and Early Occurrence of Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injuries and Falls Among Hospitalized Adults.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Evaluating the impact of Age-Adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index on in-hospital complications in patients with femoral fracture: a retrospective cohort analysis from the MIMIC-IV 2.2 database.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Decision-Tree-Based Approach for Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment in Immobilized Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pressure ulcers (PU) represent a health problem with a significant impact on the morbidity and mortality of immobilized patients, and on the quality of life of affected people and their families. Risk assessment of pressure ulcers incidence must be carried out in a structured and comprehensive manner. The Braden Scale is the result of an analysis of risk factors that includes subscales that define exactly what should be interpreted in each one. The healthcare work with evidence-based practice with an objective criterion by the nursing professional is an essential addition for the application of preventive measures. Explanatory models based on the different subscales of Braden Scale purvey an estimation to level changes in the risk of suffering PU. A binary-response logistic regression model, supported by a study with an analytical, observational, longitudinal, and prospective design in the Granada-Metropolitan Primary Healthcare District (DSGM) in Andalusia (Southern Spain), with a sample of 16,215 immobilized status patients, using a Braden Scale log, is performed. A model that includes the mobility and activity scales achieves a correct classification rate of 86% (sensitivity (S) = 87.57%, specificity (SP) = 81.69%, positive predictive value (PPV) = 91.78%, and negative preventive value (NPV) = 73.78%), while if we add the skin moisture subscale to this model, the correct classification rate is 96% (S = 90.74%, SP = 88.83%, PPV = 95.00%, and NPV = 80.42%). The six subscales provide a model with a 99.5% correct classification rate (S = 99.93%, SP = 98.50%, PPV = 99.36%, and NPV = 99.83%). This analysis provides useful information to help predict this risk in this group of patients through objective nursing criteria.
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.