ArticleDermatology reports2024
The use of dermal templates in dermato-surgery and patient perspectives.
Article in Dermatology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Acellular Intact Fish Skin Grafts for Treating Acute and Chronic Wounds.International wound journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acellular dermal matrices currently represent a useful reconstructive method in onco-dermatologic surgery. Nevertheless, they have some limitations, especially in terms of costs and outpatient post-operative wound care. While some studies on their cost-to-benefit ratio in breast surgery have already been issued, evidence is currently lacking in onco-dermatological surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes perceived by patients who had undergone onco-dermatologic surgery in which either acellular dermal matrices or skin grafts had been used as reconstructive methods. A study population of 150 patients was identified retrospectively and patients' degree of satisfaction was assessed through the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale and the Patient Scar Scale Questionnaire. Despite similar scores among the study groups, slightly better results were appreciable after single-stage grafting. However, to what extent these variations really represent a significant difference from a clinical point of view remains to be determined. Moreover, other potential bias in the interpretation of our results may reside in differences in terms of age, body location and baseline tumor size among the study groups. Therefore, further research is needed.
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.