ArticleJNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association2022
Bear Maul Injury among Patients Presenting to the Department of Surgery in a Tertiary Care Centre: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study.
Article in JNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ocular injuries caused by Japanese black bears: a 10-year retrospective analysis of severity and clinical outcomes.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Characteristics of black bear-related trauma: A retrospective observational study.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Bears are robust and agile wild creatures that can potentially inflict injuries. Black bears (Ursus thibetanus) are an inhabitant of the mountainous part of Nepal. Encounters between humans and bears generally occur in the bear-prevalent areas of Nepal and the world inflicting complex categorical injuries. The aim of the study was to find the prevalence of bear maul injury among patients presenting to the Department of Surgery in a tertiary care centre. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was done in the Department of Surgery in a tertiary care centre from 1 August 2017 to 1 September 2022. Data was collected from the records of the Department of Surgery after receiving ethical approval from the Institutional Review Committee (Reference number: 078/79/38). The collected data included time of arrival in the hospital, type of bear, types of laceration, wound type, and demographic of patients. Convenience sampling method was used. Point estimate and 95% Confidence Interval were calculated. Results: Among 2980 patients presenting to the Department of Surgery, the prevalence of bear maul injury was 15 (0.50%) (0.25-0.75, 95% Confidence Interval). Of which, all had laceration injury, with the face and scalp 9 (60%) being the highest injured site. Autumn was the season attacked most in daytime. Conclusions: The prevalence of bear maul injury was lower than in other studies done in similar settings. Keywords: bears; injuries; lacerations; Nepal; prevalence.
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.