ReviewInternational wound journal2026
Mapping Person-Centred Care in Wound Management: A Scoping Review of Frameworks, Concepts and Outcome Measures.
Review in International wound journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Empathy as Therapeutic Infrastructure in Wound Care: A Conceptual Synthesis.International wound journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Person-centred care (PCC) has been increasingly promoted in wound management, yet its theoretical foundations and practical application remain unclear. This scoping review aimed to map and synthesise how PCC frameworks, concepts and outcome measures have been used in wound care. Following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a systematic search was conducted across major databases for studies published between 2020 and 2025. Eligible sources included empirical research, reviews and conceptual papers addressing PCC in adults with chronic wounds. Data were extracted and analysed descriptively across conceptual and evaluative domains. Fourteen publications met inclusion criteria. Only one explicit framework of person-centred wound care was identified. Most studies referred to patient-centred rather than person-centred approaches and applied principles such as empowerment, shared decision-making and communication without consistent theoretical grounding. Outcome assessment focuses mainly on clinical or functional indicators, with limited attention to relational or experience-based dimensions of care. Some studies used the term person-centred as an unreflected keyword. Person-centred wound management remains conceptually fragmented, methodologically heterogeneous and sometimes unreflected. Greater theoretical precision, consensus on terminology and development of validated frameworks and measurement tools are required to translate person-centred principles into consistent, evidence-based clinical practice.
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.