ArticleScientific reports2025
Time trends in thermal burns incidence among Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS), an age-period-cohort analysis from the GBD 2019.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Review on Current Advancements in Facilitation of Burn Wound Healing.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Burns are a serious public health problem. Despite the decline in the global burden of burns, the burden of burns remains high in low- and middle-income regions, including BRICS countries. To analyse the trend of burn injury incidence in BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) from 1990 to 2019 and to provide a reference basis for burn injury prevention and management. Data were obtained from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 data, and an age‒period‒cohort model was used to analyse the burn injury incidence data of BRICS countries from 1990 to 2019 via the apc package of R 4.3.0 software. The incidence of burn injuries in BRICS countries decreased from 1990 to 2019, from 114.50 to 85.90 per 100,000, a decrease of 24.98%. Brazil had the largest decrease, 57.05%, and China had the smallest decrease, 7.66%. There was an overall decreasing trend in the incidence of burn injuries in Brazil and South Africa. The results of the age‒period‒cohort (APC) model revealed that the net drift values of burn injury incidence in India, China, South Africa, Russia, and Brazil were ( -0.05% [ 95% CI, -0.30 to 0.21 ] ), ( 0.19% [ 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.35 ] ), ( -1.35% [ 95% CI, -1.65 to -1.04 ] ), ( -0.91% [ 95% CI, -1.02 to -0.80 ] ), ( -3.33% [ 95% CI, -3.49 to -3.16 ] ), respectively. There was an overall decreasing trend in the localized drift curves in Brazil and China. The incidence of burns is greater in children and young adults. Between 1990 and 2019, the time trend had the most significant impact on Brazil's burn incidence, and the period effect also contributed positively, making Brazil the most notable among the BRICS countries in terms of improvement trends. From 1990 to 2004, the period effect positively impacted China's burn incidence, whereas from 2010 to 2019, it had a negative effect. In Brazil, South Africa, and Russia, the burden on cohorts born between 1990 and 2019 has been steadily decreasing, and the cohort effect has had a positive effect on the incidence of burns among later birth cohorts. However, in China, the burden borne by cohorts born from 1990 to 2019 has been consistently increasing. There was an overall decreasing trend in the incidence of burns in BRICS countries from 1990 to 2019. Children and adolescents have a high incidence of burns. It is recommended that burn prevention and control strategies be developed according to the age structure and economic level of different countries.
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.