ReviewCureus2024
Meta-Analysis of the Global Mortality Rate Due to Infection in Burn Patients Admitted for Plastic Surgery.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing Burn Diagnosis through SE-ResNet18 and Confidence Filtering.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Risk Factors for Sepsis and Pulmonary Embolism Mortality in Burn Patients by Using a Competing Risk Model: A Machine Learning Approach.BioMed research international · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Burn patients are generally prone to infection, which causes the patient's condition to be even worse. However, there is no study regarding the difference between the mortality rate of infected and non-infected patients. Therefore, the aim was to identify and compare the global mortality rate between infected and non-infected patients who were admitted to plastic surgery units. We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar and finally included five articles for this meta-analysis. We determined the odds ratio (OR) value by forest plot and assessed the study bias by a funnel plot. We also analyzed the quality and heterogeneity. The OR was determined as 0.43 (95%CI: 0.07-2.60), indicating a higher mortality rate in infected burn patients as compared to non-infected patients. The funnel plot showed no significant study bias. The quality of the studies was assessed high as well, and the heterogeneity was determined significant (I
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.