SynthesisInternational wound journal2025
Collagen-ORC Versus Standard Treatment in Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Collagen-ORC Versus Standard Treatment in Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials.International wound journal · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a major cause of infection, hospitalisation, and amputation. Collagen-based dressings-especially collagen combined with oxidised regenerated cellulose (ORC)-are proposed to improve healing by modulating matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), stabilising the extracellular matrix (ECM), and tempering inflammation; some formulations also include antimicrobial or bioactive adjuncts. We conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance. Adults with DFUs were eligible. Interventions included collagen-alone or collagen-combination dressings (e.g., collagen-oxidised regenerated cellulose [collagen-ORC]/silver, collagen-chitosan) versus standard of care (SOC) or alternative dressings. To ensure comparable outcomes, the quantitative synthesis was pre-specified and restricted to complete wound closure (yes/no, intention-to-treat [ITT]) from collagen-combination RCTs with aligned constructs; other outcomes were synthesised narratively. Meta-analyses were performed in Microsoft Excel using Mantel-Haenszel methods for risk ratios (RR) with a fixed-effect primary model and DerSimonian-Laird random-effects sensitivity analysis; heterogeneity was summarised with Cochran's Q, between-study variance (τ
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.