ArticleCureus2024
Assessing Return to Work Outcomes for Individuals Affected by Burn Injuries: A Comprehensive Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional Recovery and Emotional Burden After Burn Injury: A Quality of Life Assessment in Romanian Burn Survivors.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exhaled carbon monoxide concentration in correlation to clinical parameters to detect carbon monoxide poisoning among fire victims in an Egyptian Emergency Department.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2025Article
- The Life Impact Burn Recovery Evaluation (LIBRE) Profile: Historical Overview and Future Directions.European burn journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Burn injuries can have long-lasting effects on individuals, including their ability to return to work (RTW). This study aims to comprehensively analyze factors influencing the RTW status of burn patients after their injuries. Methods A dataset containing information on gender, age groups, burn types, discharge status, burn causes, employment status, total body surface area (TBSA) burn, and more were analyzed. The dataset covered the years 2018 to 2020. Chi-square tests were used for categorical data, while Mann-Whitney U tests were used for continuous variables. The participant characteristics, activity impairment, and work results were investigated using descriptive statistics. Results The number of reported burn cases was higher among males than females in 2018, 2019, and 2020. The highest burn cases occurred within the 25-40 age group. Most of the patients were involved in manual labor-intensive work prior to burn injury, unemployed individuals also accounted for a notable proportion of the cases. Most patients analyzed for the study had sustained 20-40% TBSA burn. From a total of 1130 patients, 710 (62.83%) of patients returned to work, and (37.16%) did not RTW. Conclusion Understanding the factors influencing the RTW status of burn patients after one year is crucial for effective occupational rehabilitation. This analysis provides insights into gender differences, age distribution, burn types, discharge outcomes, causes of burn incidents, employment status, TBSA burn, and the relationship between these factors and RTW rates.
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.