ReviewBurns & trauma2025
Understanding the pathophysiology of
Review in Burns & trauma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Regenerative Performance and Structural Persistence of Silk Fibroin Matrices in Human Infected and Non-Infected Ex Vivo Wounds.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Phytochemical Characterisation and Skin-Relevant In Vitro Biological Activity of Leaf Extracts from SelectedMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Surgical Site Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance: Six Years of Data from a Western Romanian Hospital.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Microbial Biofilms as Barriers to Chronic Wound Healing: Diagnostic Challenges and Therapeutic Advances.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Distribution of Carbapenemase Genes Associated With Global High-Risk Sequence Types in Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolates From Chronic Leg Ulcer Patients in Northern Tanzania.International wound journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic leg wounds represent a major burden of disease worldwide, costing health care systems billions of dollars each year. Aside from the financial implications, they also impose a significant physical and psychosocial burden on the patient, their relatives and/or carers, and the community. Whilst measures such as maintenance of wound hygiene, debridement, dressings and compression are the current standard of care, complete healing is not always achievable and ulcer recurrence is common. Thus, there is still a gap to breach in terms of understanding the intricate pathophysiology of chronic wounds and the role this plays on treatment and management.
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.