Figure 13. Disposition of Submission by Smith & Nephew (Text description)

Technology assessment on negative pressure wound therapy devices.


Select [D] below for full text description of this figure.

Figure 13 is an attrition diagram that depicts the status of documents that Smith & Nephew submitted for possible inclusion in the report.

The diagram begins with a box outlining the total submission of 82 documents. Several boxes ensue which are connected by arrows going from top to bottom which follow the submissions as they are being screened for possible inclusion in the report.

In the first frame, we compare Smith & Nephew's submission to submissions by other interested stakeholders and remove any duplicates. Smith & Nephew had 17 duplicate submissions.

An arrow leads from the 65 Unique Submissions to the Initial Screening Phase where documents may be excluded, used in our Background Section or passed to the next level. In this instance, 21 documents were identified for exclusion. One was an abstract; one was a personal communication; and 19 were other documents not relevant to the report.

Seven documents were identified for inclusion in our Background Section.

The path then follows the 37 full articles remaining. During this phase of screening we do a more extensive screening which is again based on our pre-determined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Go to our Methods Section for additional information on the criteria.

35 full articles were excluded during this evaluation phase. One was an animal study; one was an in vitro study; 27 were not a NPWT study, and six were excluded for Other Reasons which may include "inclusion of healthy subjects", "lack of reporting wound healing outcomes" or "patients treated with dual therapies."

Two full articles remained for possible inclusion in the report. One article was a published study which was not identified in our literature search and met the inclusion criteria. This study was ultimately included in Key Question 3. In addition, one unpublished article was included in Key Question 3 due to relevancy of the study. Note: Language has been corrected to reflect screening of meeting abstracts, poster presentations and other documents in addition to abstracts of full articles.

Return to Document

Current as of November 2009
Internet Citation: Figure 13. Disposition of Submission by Smith & Nephew (Text description). November 2009. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.