ArticleEuropean burn journal2026
How Patients Seek and Value Online Scar-Related Information: A Qualitative Study.
Article in European burn journal, 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPathological scarring (PS) following surgical procedures, burns, or trauma poses significant clinical, psychological, and socio-economic challenges. Despite the high prevalence of PS, reliable information resources are limited, often leading individuals to depend on unvalidated online sources. To address this gap, we developed MyScarSpecialist.com, an evidence-based website providing comprehensive information on scar types, characteristics, and treatment options. This study aimed to optimize the website through co-creation with patients and clinicians.
methodsSemi-structured focus group meetings were conducted with patients and carers; sessions were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis.
resultsFrom the 3 focus group meetings with 15 patients with scars and 3 carers, four key themes emerged: (1) Information Sources: The Role of Professionals, Peers, and Digital Media in information sharing; (2) Desired information: From scar typing to treatment outcomes to psychosocial impact; (3) Website design: Audience preferences on content layering, information load, and image positioning; (4) Readability: Optimizing content for comprehension. Participants highlighted the need for enhanced peer support and resources addressing the psychological impact of scarring.
conclusionsThese findings provide comprehensive insights for optimizing medical educational websites, ensuring inclusivity, accessibility, and empowerment for patients through co-designed strategies.
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.