ArticleEuropean burn journal2022
Towards the Holistic Assessment of Scar Management Interventions.
Article 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 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.
- Measurement Equivalence and Feasibility of the Electronic and Paper Versions of the POSAS, EQ-5D, and DLQI: A Randomized Crossover Trial.European burn journal · 2024Article
- Working Towards Holistic Scar Assessment and Improved Shared Decision Making in Global Burn Care.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Presently, research assessments of burn scar management interventions focus on measures of scarring and scar features. However, qualitative research demonstrates that patients experience scarring and scar management therapies holistically. Patient-centred assessment should reflect this. An agreement is required regarding what to assess, which tools and measures to use and at what time points. Key issues include (1) whether and how burn- or scar-related quality-of-life measures could be included in the assessment of scar management interventions and how these are weighed against scar measures; (2) routine inclusion of the assessment of treatment burden (or treatment experience) in comparative research and (3) generating further understanding of the relationship between scar management and psychosocial adaptation, along with an assessment of this. A debate concerning a holistic and standardized evaluation of scar management interventions is needed to ensure that future evidence-based decisions are made in a patient-centred manner.
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.