SynthesisInternational wound journal2023
The usefulness of platelet-rich plasma to manage skin wounds: A meta-analysis.
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 It has been retracted, and should not be counted.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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- The usefulness of platelet-rich plasma to manage skin wounds: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- RETRACTION: The Usefulness of Platelet-Rich Plasma to Manage Skin Wounds: A Meta-Analysis.International wound journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2025-02-11Author Unresponsive · Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A meta-analysis investigation to measure the usefulness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to manage skin wounds (SWs). A comprehensive literature inspection till February 2023 was applied and 1349 interrelated investigations were reviewed. The 22 chosen investigations enclosed animals' SWs were in the chosen investigations' starting point, 3348 of them were treated with PRP, and 2259 were control. Odds ratio (OR) in addition to 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compute the value of the usefulness of PRP to manage SWs by the dichotomous and continuous approaches and a fixed or random model. PRP significantly higher percent of decreases in open wound area (OWA) (MD, 10.07; 95% CI, 6.55-13.59, P < 0.001), and lower healing time (HT) (MD, -6.31; 95% CI, -10.69 to -1.93, P = 0.005) compared to control in animals' SWs. PRP had a significantly higher percent of decreases in OWA and lower HT compared to control in animals' SWs. However, caused of the small sample sizes of several chosen investigations for this meta-analysis, care must be exercised when dealing with its values.
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.