MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410887948 · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000855

Impact of digital wound care solution on healing time: A descriptive study in home health settings

2025· article· en· W4410887948 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Digital Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWound healingHealth careSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic wounds pose significant challenges in home healthcare (HH) due to prolonged healing times and high costs. Digital wound care solutions (DWCS) have shown potential for improving healing efficiency. This study evaluated the impact of continuous DWCS use on healing times at HH organizations and explored area reduction in non-healed yet improved pressure injuries (PIs) and diabetic ulcers (DUs). METHODS: This descriptive study analyzed 195,915 wound assessments from 59 HH organizations using DWCS in 2022 and 2023. Average healing time was calculated by wound type and compared across the two years, with subgroup analyses for wounds healing within three months versus longer. Improvements in non-healed DUs and PIs were further categorized by initial wound size (≤2 cm², >2 cm² for DUs; ≤4 cm², >4 cm² for PIs). RESULTS: Average healing time for all wounds decreased significantly from 62.5 days in 2022 to 38.6 days in 2023, a 38.2% improvement (p < 0.001). DU and PIs showed reductions of 30.8 and 29.3 days, respectively. The proportion of wounds healing within three months rose by 8.9%, with decreased average healing times within this period. For wounds requiring over three months, the average time saved was 57.6 days (8.2 weeks; P = 0.014), representing a 27% improvement. Non-healed but improving PIs showed increase in area reduction from 5.2 cm² to 17.7 cm², with a 25.4% faster time to reduction. Larger PIs (>4 cm²) showed greater reductions, with time to improvement decreasing by 35.5 days (34.7%, p < 0.001). DUs also improved, with area reduction increasing from 4.8 cm² to 15.3 cm² and a 23.8% faster reduction time, while larger DUs (>2 cm²) saw a 32.6-day decrease in time to improvement. CONCLUSION: Continuous DWCS use significantly reduces healing times and improves wound area reduction, underscoring its effectiveness in enhancing wound care outcomes in HH settings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.367 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it