[A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions in treating chronic wound pain in patients].

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.

1. [Clinical effects of extracorporeal shock wave combined with complex decongestive therapy in the treatment of lower limb lymphedema after cervical cancer surgery].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2025
   Trial
2. [Performance of PHMB-surface mesoporous silica composite material and its effect on infected full-thickness skin defect wounds in rats].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2026
   Article
3. [A compulsory course in clinical treatment of burn patients: pain and analgesia].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2026
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as