ArticleInternational wound journal2025
RETRACTION: Effects of Clinical Nursing Pathway on Surgical Site Wound Infection in Patients Undergoing Acute Appendicitis Surgery: A Meta-Analysis.
Article in International wound journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Retraction of
Authors and funding
0 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
retractionQ. Zhang, L.-H. Zhang, J.-L. Wu, and F.-Y. Yang, "Effects of Clinical Nursing Pathway on Surgical Site Wound Infection in Patients Undergoing Acute Appendicitis Surgery: A Meta-Analysis," International Wound Journal 21, no. 4 (2024): e14600, https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.14600. The above article, published online on 25 December 2023, in Wiley Online Library (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/), has been retracted by agreement between the journal Editor in Chief, Professor Keith Harding; and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. A third party reported to the publisher that several references included in the article were unavailable. An investigation by the publisher verified that some references did not have available online records. Following additional investigation, all parties have concluded that this article was accepted solely on the basis of a compromised peer review process. In view of the clear evidence of compromised peer review, the parties agreed that the paper must be retracted. The authors did not respond to our notice regarding the retraction.
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.