ReviewEuropean burn journal2025
Enhancing Burn Recovery: A Systematic Review on the Benefits of Electrical Stimulation in Accelerating Healing.
Review in European burn journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuromodulation strategies in postburn care for pain rehabilitation and scar remodelling.Communications medicine · 2026Review
- Electrochemical modulation of host-microbe dynamics in wound healing.Frontiers in microbiology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prolonged healing time of acute burn wounds is associated with increased pain, infection, risk of scarring, poorer mobility and higher financial and emotional burden. Electrical stimulation (ES) reduces healing time in chronic wounds; however, its reported use on acute burn wounds is limited. This systematic review (SR) aimed to evaluate the relative benefit of ES compared to routine wound care on the healing time of acute burn wounds in adults. The online databases queried included Cochrane Database of SR's, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED and CINAHL. The search criteria included RCTs involving the application of ES of varying voltage, duration and modality in acute burn patients aged ≥18 years. The primary outcome investigated was days to burn wound closure, while the secondary outcomes included edema and infection. Four RCTs were discovered, involving a total of 143 participants with a mean age 35.5 years. Two RCTs demonstrated (a) 36% (2.6 days) reduction in time to wound closure with ES (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.