ArticleBMJ open2023
Risk factors of incontinence-associated dermatitis in older adults: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors and prevalence of incontinence-associated dermatitis in elderly patients: a meta-analysis and systematic review.BMC geriatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Symptom heterogeneity and factors associated with dignity-related distress in older adults with incontinence-associated dermatitis.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- The Effect of a Smart Diaper Sensor on Incontinence-Associated Dermatitis Afflicting a Sedentary Patient with Cognitive Impairment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDue to their ageing skin, older adults are more likely to develop incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD). Although previous attempts to look at the risk factors for IAD in older adults were done, methodological barriers hindered an in-depth understanding. By investigating risk factors for IAD in the ageing population, the development of precise clinical interventions and guidance could be facilitated, which in turn would enhance patient care standards for incontinence management in this target group. To address this knowledge gap, this systematic review with meta-analysis aims to explore the major risk elements linked to IAD among older adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols are adhered to in this systematic review and meta-analysis. To achieve its objectives, a comprehensive search strategy PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medline, Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP database), WanFang Data Knowledge Service Platform, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, along with other relevant sources published until 18 July 2023 in both English and Chinese languages will be performed. The screening of articles, data abstraction and risk of bias evaluation will be done by two impartial reviewers. RevMan V.5.3 software will be used for data synthesis. The quality of the included study will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment tool and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: There is no need for ethical approval. Individual patient information or the rights of participants will not be compromised by this protocol. The findings will either be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023442585.
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.