Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39599957›Full record

ReviewEuropean burn journal2022

The Use of Infrared Thermography (IRT) in Burns Depth Assessment: A Diagnostic Accuracy Meta-Analysis.

Aqua Asif, Constantinos Poyiatzis, Firas J Raheman, Djamila M Rojoa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European burn journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Aqua AsifGeorge Davies Centre, Leicester Medical School, University of Leicester, Lancaster Rd., Leicester LE1 7HA, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3233-7428
Constantinos PoyiatzisGeorge Davies Centre, Leicester Medical School, University of Leicester, Lancaster Rd., Leicester LE1 7HA, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8323-917X
Firas J RahemanEast and North Hertforshire NHS Trust, Coreys Mill Lane, Stevenage SG1 4AB, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7374-7015
Djamila M RojoaImperial College NHS Trust, Praed Street, London W2 1NY, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe timely diagnosis of burns depth is crucial to avoid unnecessary surgery and delays in adequate management of patients with burn injuries. Whilst it is mostly a clinical diagnosis, indocyanine green, laser Doppler imaging and infrared thermography have been used alongside clinical findings to support the diagnosis. Infrared thermography is a noninvasive technique which uses temperature differences to diagnose tissue burn depth. Our study aims to assess its use in differentiating between superficial and deep burns.

methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis using electronic databases. We used a mixed-effects logistic regression bivariate model to estimate summary sensitivity and specificity and developed hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curves.

resultsWe identified 6 studies reporting a total of 197 burns, of which 92 were proven to be deep burns. The reference standard was clinical assessment at the time of injury and burn healing time. The pooled estimates for sensitivity and specificity were 0.84 (95% CI 0.71-0.92) and 0.76 (95% CI 0.56-0.89), respectively.

conclusionsIRT is a promising burns assessment modality which may allow surgeons to correctly classify burn injuries at the time of presentation. This will allow a more efficient management of burns and timely surgical intervention.

Indexed as

burnsdepth assessmentdiagnosisinfrared thermography

Identifiers

PMID39599957
PMCPMC11571867

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.