Skip to main content
. 2018 Jan 11;13(1):e0191093. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191093

Fig 3. Forest plot: PRP vs control, meta-analysis 1: Reduction of open wound area (negative ES, positioned on the left of the null value: favours control; positive ES, positioned on the right of the null value: favours PRP).

Fig 3

Heterogeneity analysis: Q = 39.35; df = 14; P = 0.000; I2 = 64.42; T2 = 0.14; T = 0.37. (ES: effect size; 95%CI: confidence interval; W: weight; V: variance; SE: standard error; Sig: statistical significance (p-value); N: total sample size; N1: sample size PRP group; N2: sample size control group; Q, I2, T2 and T: indexes of heterogeneity; df: degrees of freedom).