ArticleEuropean burn journal2026
Association Between Rehabilitation Frequency and Functional Outcomes After Burn Injury: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of Confounding by Indication.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify key predictors of clinical outcomes in burn survivors and clarify the role of mixed-depth burns and confounding by indication in observational rehabilitation research.
designRetrospective cohort study using data from a burn rehabilitation registry (January 2024 to July 2025).
settingBurn rehabilitation center.
participants120 adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with burns affecting ≥1% total body surface area (TBSA) and complete baseline data.
interventionsNot applicable.
main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was functional improvement (ΔFIM). Secondary outcomes included pain reduction (ΔPain), scar severity (Vancouver Scar Scale; VSS), Activities of Daily Living (ADL) improvement, and Range of Motion (ROM) recovery. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were used to identify predictors.
resultsPatients achieved significant improvements in function (mean ΔFIM = 11.3 ± 8.9 points) and pain (mean ΔPain = 1.28 ± 0.81). Having a mixed-depth burn was the strongest predictor of worse scar outcomes (β = 2.52, 95% CI: 0.93 to 4.12,
conclusionsInjury characteristics, particularly the presence of a mixed-depth burn, emerged as the dominant predictors of long-term scar and functional outcomes. This study identifies mixed-depth burns as a potentially high-risk clinical phenotype requiring targeted therapeutic strategies and demonstrates the critical importance of accounting for confounding by indication when evaluating rehabilitation outcomes in observational burn research.
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.