***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: Three studies (212 participants) were included in this review. The overall risk of bias was high for two trials and unclear for one. One trial (101 participants) compared ozone treatment with antibiotics for foot ulcers in people with DM. The study had a follow-up period of 20 days. This study showed that ozone treatment was associated with a greater reduction in ulcer area from baseline to the end of the study than treatment with antibiotics (MD -20.54 cm2, 95% CI -20.61 to -20.47), and a shorter duration of hospitalisation (MD -8.00 days, 95% CI -14.17 to -1.83), but did not appear to affect the number of ulcers healed over 20 days (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.40). No side effects were observed in either group. The other two trials (111 participants) compared ozone treatment plus usual care with usual care for foot ulcers in people with DM. The meta-analysis results did not show evidence of a difference between groups for the outcomes of reduction of ulcer area (MD -2.11 cm2, 95% CI -5.29 to 1.07), the number of ulcers healed (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.17), adverse events (RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.48 to 10.79), or amputation rate (RR 2.73, 95%CI 0.12, 64.42). The available evidence was three small RCTs with unclear methodology, so we are unable to draw any firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of ozone therapy for foot ulcers in people with DM.
Output:

The review authors searched the medical literature up to March 3 2015, and identified three relevant clinical trials (212 participants) that investigated ozone therapy for the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes. The available evidence was of low quality. One trial, with 101 participants, compared ozone treatment with antibiotics and followed up for 20 days. The results of this study showed that the reduction in ulcer size was greater, and also the length of hospital stay was shorter, in those receiving ozone treatment, but there was no apparent benefit in terms of the number of foot ulcers healed. No adverse effects (side effects or harms) were observed with either treatment. The other two trials (111 participants) compared ozone treatment plus usual care with usual care. The results of these two studies showed that there were no apparent differences between the groups for reduction in ulcer size,the number of foot ulcers healed, or occurrence of adverse events and amputation rates. Quality of life was not reported by either trial. On the basis of the limited and poor quality information available, the review authors were unable to draw any conclusions about the effectiveness of ozone therapy for treating foot ulcers in people with DM.