不同出口部位护理敷料对预防非热带地区腹膜透析相关感染的效果：系统综述和网络荟萃分析

数据集获取（Figshare）

• 源站标题：Effect of different exit-site care dressings on preventing peritoneal dialysis related infection from nontropical area: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
• DOI：10.6084/m9.figshare.26310346.v1
• 发布日期：2024-07-16
• 文件数：3 个
• 文件总体积：12.25 MB
• 源站页面：https://tandf.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Effect_of_different_exit-site_care_dressings_on_preventing_peritoneal_dialysis_related_infection_from_nontropical_area_a_systematic_review_and_network_meta-analysis/26310346

命令行下载

curl -L -o "irnf_a_2376331_sm5667.pdf" "https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/47710831"
curl -L -o "irnf_a_2376331_sm0465.docx" "https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/47710834"
curl -L -o "irnf_a_2376331_sm0464.docx" "https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/47710837"

文件清单

• irnf_a_2376331_sm5667.pdf（837.22 KB）
• irnf_a_2376331_sm0465.docx（10.18 MB）
• irnf_a_2376331_sm0464.docx（1.24 MB）

文件总体积 12.25 MB（源站 API 实测）。

数据加载示例（图像类）

from PIL import Image
import glob, os

files = (glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.png"), recursive=True)
       + glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.jpg"), recursive=True)
       + glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.tif"), recursive=True))
print("图像文件数:", len(files))
img = Image.open(files[0]); print("尺寸/模式:", img.size, img.mode)

# torchvision Dataset 方式:
# from torchvision import datasets
# ds = datasets.ImageFolder(path)  # 要求 子目录=类别

目录组织与标注格式以源站说明和下载后实际文件为准。

数据说明

This study aims to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of various dressings in preventing exit-site infection (ESI) and peritonitis.
We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCO), Sino Med, Wan Fang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) from 1 January 1999 to 10 July 2023. The language restrictions were Chinese and English. Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, and self-controlled trials were included in this study. We used ROB 2 tool to evaluate the quality of the included literature. Two authors independently extracted the data according to the Cochrane Handbook. A Frequentist network meta-analysis was performed using Stata17.0 according to PRISAMA with a random effects model.
From 2092 potentially eligible studies, thirteen studies were selected for analysis, including nine randomized controlled studies, three quasi-experimental studies and one self-controlled trial. A total of 1229 patients were included to compare five types of exit site care dressings, named disinfection dressings, antibacterial dressings, non-antibacterial occlusive dressings, sterile gauze, and no-particular dressings. The outcome of prevention ESI is antibacterial dressings (SUCRA = 97.6) >non-antibacterial occlusive dressings (SUCRA = 68.3) >disinfection dressings (SUCRA = 50.6) >no-particular dressings (SUCRA = 23.9) >sterile gauze (SUCRA = 9.5). The antibacterial dressings were more effective than sterile gauze (OR = 0.13, 95%CI 0.04∼0.44), and no-particular dressing (OR = 0.18, 95%CI 0.07∼0.50) in preventing ESI; the non-antibacterial occlusive dressings were effective than sterile gauze (OR:0.30, 95%CI 0.16∼0.57). There is no statistical significance between no-particular dressings and other types of dressings in preventing the mature ESI. There is no statistical significance in the effectiveness of five types of dressings in preventing peritonitis.
The no-particular dressings maybe more cost-effective for preventing mature ESI. None of the dressings was more effective than another in preventing peritonitis. Then, none of the different types of dre

许可

CC BY 4.0

引用

学术使用请引用 DOI 10.6084/m9.figshare.26310346.v1（source: https://tandf.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Effect_of_different_exit-site_care_dressings_on_preventing_peritoneal_dialysis_related_infection_from_nontropical_area_a_systematic_review_and_network_meta-analysis/26310346）。