ArticleInternational wound journal2024
RETRACTED: Reliability of evidence supporting the role of electrical stimulation in the treatment of pressure ulcers.
Article in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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.
- RETRACTION: Reliability of Evidence Supporting the Role of Electrical Stimulation in the Treatment of Pressure Ulcers.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Effect of 10 kV/m Electric Field Therapy in a Pressure Injury Model in Rats: An Innovative Preliminary Report.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- RETRACTED: Reliability of evidence supporting the role of electrical stimulation in the treatment of pressure ulcers.International wound journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Retracted
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To systematically appraise the evidence from overlapping systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) on electrical stimulation for pressure ulcers. A thorough search of public databases was conducted to collect SRs/MAs on electrical stimulation for pressure ulcers. Two independent authors used the AMSTAR-2 tool, the PRISMA checklists and the GRADE system to appraise the methodological quality, reporting quality and evidence quality of eligible SRs/MAs. Ten eligible SRs/MAs were included. The methodological quality of two SRs/MAs were determined to be high, six were determined to be very low and two were assessed as being of low quality. For PRISMA checklists, potential factors that undermined the quality of reporting were the lack of reporting on the registration of protocols, search, additional analysis of methodology and additional analysis of results. With GRADE, the evidence quality of two outcomes were determined to be moderate, six were determined to be low and two were assessed as being of very low quality. Electrical stimulation appears to be an adjunctive therapy that may promote the healing of pressure ulcers, but the available evidence suggests caution in recommending electrical stimulation widely for the treatment of pressure ulcers. Large-scale trials are the focus of future research to find out how electrical stimulation affects all important outcomes.
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.