Corrigendum to “A systematic review on the impact of sub‐epidermal moisture assessments on pressure ulcer/injury care delivery pathways”
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsPressure Ulcer Prevention and Management · Wound Healing and Treatments
Avsar P, Patton D, Cuddigan J, Moore Z. A systematic review on the impact of sub‐epidermal moisture assessments on pressure ulcer/injury care delivery pathways. Int Wound J. 2024;21(6):e14928. doi:10.1111/iwj.14928.
The PU incidence for the usual care group was incorrectly stated as 25%. It should be 2.5% (401/15790).
There is a statistically significant difference in visual PI/PU development in favour of the use of care pathways based on SEM assessments (PU incidence 1%, 27/2661, care pathway group, versus 2.5%, 401/15 790 usual care group).”
We apologise for this error.