Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40585345›Full record

ArticleFoot & ankle orthopaedics2025

Topical

Joshua T Chew, Joshua J Xu, Thomas A J Goff, Karen A Fogarty, Michael J Symes, Brahman S Sivakumar, Andrew P Wines

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foot & ankle orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Joshua T ChewRoyal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1829-1766
Joshua J XuRoyal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.
Thomas A J GoffMid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Wakefield, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0330-5825
Karen A FogartySydney Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Research Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Michael J SymesRoyal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4613-2653
Brahman S SivakumarRoyal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.
Andrew P WinesSydney Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Research Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Numerous ointments may be applied to surgical incisions in the postoperative period to minimize scar formation. There is little evidence assessing their efficacy on wound healing following foot and ankle procedures. This trial was conducted to assess the efficacy of Methods: A prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial of adults who had undergone elective foot and ankle surgery was performed. Participants were randomized into receiving either a protocol of Results: Significant improvements were noted in observer-reported wound vascularity, pigmentation, thickness, relief, pliability, and surface area with the use of Urucu, when compared to the control ointment. Overall, observers reported that scars treated with Urucu cream were found to more closely resemble normal skin with an overall POSAS score of 2.56 compared with 3.33 for the control ointment ( Conclusion: Topical Urucu ointment demonstrated promising early improvements in POSAS scores from both patients and observers, particularly in pigmentation and pliability domains, but findings should be interpreted cautiously because of the small sample size and short follow-up. Level of Evidence: Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Indexed as

Bixa orellana (Urucu)wound healing

Identifiers

PMID40585345
PMCPMC12202939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.