SynthesisInternational wound journal2023
A systematic review of caregivers' knowledge and related factors towards pressure ulcer prevention.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of caregivers' knowledge and related factors towards pressure ulcer prevention.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- A systematic review of nursing students' attitude and related factors towards pressure ulcer prevention.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- [Current status and influencing factors of care burden in informal caregivers of patients with pressure injuries].Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025Article
- RETRACTION: A Systematic Review of Caregivers' Knowledge and Related Factors Towards Pressure Ulcer Prevention.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Knowledge of Home Caregivers on Pressure Ulcer Signs and Prevention in Elderly Patients in Al Ahsa.Cureus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2025-02-25Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Company/Institution · Investigation by Third Party · Objections by Author(s) ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to examine the knowledge of caregivers regarding pressure ulcer (PU) prevention. A thorough, methodical search was conducted from the earliest date to February 1, 2023 using keywords extracted from Medical Subject Headings such as "Caregivers", "Knowledge", and "Pressure ulcer" in various international electronic databases such as Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Persian electronic databases such as Iranmedex and Scientific Information Database. The quality of the studies included in this systematic review was evaluated using an appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies (AXIS tool). In total, 927 caregivers participated in the eight studies. The average age of the participants was 40.50 (SD = 12.67). Among the participants, 61.87% were women. The average caregiver's knowledge of PU prevention was 53.70 (SD = 14.09) out of 100, which suggests a moderate level of knowledge. Factors such as level of education, age, occupation, information about PUs, attitude, and practice had a significant positive relationship with caregivers' knowledge related to the prevention of PUs. Knowledge had a significantly negative relationship with age. In addition, marital status, type of relationship, age, gender, occupation, level of education, and inpatient wards had a significant relationship with caregivers' knowledge regarding PUs prevention. Therefore, managers and policymakers in the medical field can help increase caregivers' knowledge by providing an online or in-person educational platform relevant to PU prevention.
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.