ArticleInternational wound journal2023
Quality registry improves the data of chronic ulcers: Validation of Tampere Wound Registry.
Article in International wound journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increases in One-year Mortality Risk Among Chronic Skin Ulcer Patients During the Period 1980-2020.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2026Article
- Analyzing the medical record homepages quality in a Chinese EMR system.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Creation of a National Chronic Wound Registry-Challenges and Opportunities.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Characteristics of chronic ulcer patients by gender and ulcer aetiology from a multidisciplinary wound centre.International wound journal · 2024Article
- The role of split-thickness skin grafting in the treatment of vasculitic and pyoderma gangrenosum ulcers in a multidisciplinary wound centre.International wound journal · 2024Article
- Quality registry improves the data of chronic ulcers: Validation of Tampere Wound Registry.International wound journal · 2023Article
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
Abstract
Quality registries are potential tools for improving health care documentation, but the quality and completeness of each registry should be ensured. This study aimed to evaluate the completion rate (completeness) and accuracy of data, first contact-to-registration time (timeliness), and case coverage of the Tampere Wound Registry (TWR) to assess whether it can be reliably used in clinical practice and for research purposes. Data from all 923 patients registered in the TWR between 5 June 2018 and 31 December 2020 were included in the analysis of data completeness, while data accuracy, timeliness and case coverage were analysed in those registered during the year 2020. In all analyses values over 80% were considered good and values over 90% excellent. The study showed that the overall completeness of the TWR was 81% and overall accuracy was 93%. Timeliness achieved 86% within the first 24 h, and case coverage was found to be 91%. When completion of seven selected variables was compared between TWR and patient medical records, the TWR was found to be more complete in five out of seven variables. In conclusion, the TWR proved to be a reliable tool for health care documentation and an even more reliable data source than patient medical records.
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.