ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
Surgical Dressing Cosmesis in the Immediate Postoperative Setting: A Crowdsourcing-based Study.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2025. 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.
- An Update on Post-Surgical Wound Healing Management and Lower-Cost Alternatives: A Narrative Review for Healthcare Providers.Health science reports · 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
Background: Postoperative dressings expedite wound healing and decrease the rate of infection. Options for wound dressings vary based on cost, time to apply, method of wound healing, and availability at the hospital; however, a significant difference in postoperative complications between each type has not been found. As such, this study evaluates patient cosmetic preferences for various wound dressings as it relates to early postoperative satisfaction. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online crowdsourcing service that connects research studies to participants. The survey asked users to rate images of various wound dressings. Steri-Strips, Dermabond PRINEO (Johnson & Johnson, Ethicon, Inc.), gauze, surgical tape, and metal staples were the materials assessed. The ratings, based on cleanliness, compactness, and aesthetics, culminated in an average cosmetic score for each dressing. Results: Controlled for demographics, Steri-Strips and staples were the highest rated dressing types by participants and may correlate with increased patient satisfaction in the immediate postoperative period. Gauze was highly rated for aesthetics and cleanliness but averaged lower scores due to dressing bulk. Dermabond and surgical tape had the lowest and second lowest cosmetic score, respectively. Conclusions: Although cost, availability, and time to apply are common factors surgeons evaluate when picking a dressing, cosmetic preference is another consideration. Allowing the patient to participate in dressing selection may give them more perceived autonomy and increase immediate postoperative satisfaction. Limitations of this study include limited lighting/positioning standardization of dressing photographs. This analysis does not consider opinions on later wound healing or scarring using the chosen material.
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.