致编辑的信:对 Bull 等人撰写的《评估伤口愈合干预措施的新型随机试验协议》(PMID: 37526355)的批判性评价。

IF 5.8 3区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY
Adam Astrada, Budi Mulyana, Ratna Dewi
{"title":"致编辑的信:对 Bull 等人撰写的《评估伤口愈合干预措施的新型随机试验协议》(PMID: 37526355)的批判性评价。","authors":"Adam Astrada, Budi Mulyana, Ratna Dewi","doi":"10.1089/wound.2024.0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7413,"journal":{"name":"Advances in wound care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Re: \\\"A Novel Randomized Trial Protocol for Evaluating Wound Healing Interventions\\\" by Bull <i>et al</i>.\",\"authors\":\"Adam Astrada, Budi Mulyana, Ratna Dewi\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/wound.2024.0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\",\"PeriodicalId\":7413,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in wound care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in wound care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2024.0001\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in wound care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2024.0001","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本回复对 "评估伤口愈合干预措施的新型随机试验方案 "研究进行了批判性评估,强调了关键问题并提出了改进建议。该研究偏离了标准的分析原则,其特点是力量不足和缺乏队列比较,这使人对其结论的可靠性产生怀疑。严格遵守既定的随机对照试验方法对于伤口愈合研究中的有效证据至关重要。此外,加入磨合阶段给受试者招募带来了挑战,导致大量符合条件的参与者流失。简化研究设计以尽量减少此类障碍,对于确保可行性和获得足够的统计能力至关重要。使用激光辅助伤口测量(LAWM)设备虽然经过了面积测量的验证,但会忽略伤口深度,从而带来潜在的偏差。这一局限性凸显了对测量工具进行细致考虑的必要性,以确保数据收集的全面性和准确性。该研究提出的结果方案忽略了伤口愈合的关键参数,如伤口床质量和隧道/凹陷。提倡根据伤口病因定制评分系统可以解决这些疏忽,从而提高研究的临床相关性。这一批判性回应强调了严谨的研究方法和全面的结果评估对推动伤口愈合研究的重要性。解决这些问题将有助于建立一个更强大的证据库,促进伤口愈合干预转化成果的改善。Harding & Clements 代表 Bull 等人明确回应了提出的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Re: "A Novel Randomized Trial Protocol for Evaluating Wound Healing Interventions" by Bull et al.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in wound care
Advances in wound care Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
4.10%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Advances in Wound Care rapidly shares research from bench to bedside, with wound care applications for burns, major trauma, blast injuries, surgery, and diabetic ulcers. The Journal provides a critical, peer-reviewed forum for the field of tissue injury and repair, with an emphasis on acute and chronic wounds. Advances in Wound Care explores novel research approaches and practices to deliver the latest scientific discoveries and developments. Advances in Wound Care coverage includes: Skin bioengineering, Skin and tissue regeneration, Acute, chronic, and complex wounds, Dressings, Anti-scar strategies, Inflammation, Burns and healing, Biofilm, Oxygen and angiogenesis, Critical limb ischemia, Military wound care, New devices and technologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信