SynthesisNutrients2024
The Use of Honey for Cicatrization and Pain Control of Obstetric Wounds: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Botanical Origin-Dependent Phytochemical Profiles and Pharmaceutical Properties of Medical-Grade Honeys: Transdermal Delivery and Antibacterial Efficacy in a Wound Fluid Model.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Efficacy of Honey for the Treatment of Perineal Wounds Following Vaginal Birth: A Narrative Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Optimization of Metal-Based Nanoparticle Composite Formulations and Their Application in Wound Dressings.International journal of nanomedicine · 2025Review
- Exuberant Granulation Complicating an Episiotomy Wound: Case Report on the Treatment Using Surgical Excision and Estrogen Vaginal Cream.International medical case reports journal · 2025Article
- High-Dose versus Low-Dose Oxytocin for Labor Augmentation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSeveral studies point to antibacterial properties and beneficial effects of honey on scar tissue formation, which is a low-cost and easy-to-use option. This study aimed to compare honey versus a placebo for cicatrization and pain control of obstetric wounds, and determine if one is superior to the other, in terms of efficacy, through a meta-analysis.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science. Two independent investigators identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing honey and a placebo for obstetric wounds. The primary outcomes were wound healing and pain control.
resultsFive randomized controlled trials and 353 patients were included, of whom, 177 (50.1%) were treated with honey. Differences were not found in the final wound healing between the honey and placebo groups (MD -0.34; 95% CI -1.13, 0.44;
conclusionAccording to the study results, honey treatments showed greater efficiency and provided benefits to the patients by accelerating wound healing and decreasing reported pain.
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.