ArticleAtencion primaria2012
[Resources and models for diabetic foot care in Catalonia (Spain): a descriptive study on areas of improvement].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Three Decades of Use of the Minimum Basic Data Set in Infectious Disease Research in Spain: A Scoping Review with an Evidence-Mapping Approach.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Review
- Evaluation of the Complementary Health Provision of the Podiatric Foot Care Program for Diabetic Patients in Catalonia (Spain).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify areas of improvement in diabetic foot care as regards the availability of materials and specialties in primary and secondary care. To determine the model of care for surgical centres and hospitals caring for diabetic foot problems and their relation to amputations.
designCross-sectional study SETTING AND
participantsRandom sample of 36 basic health areas (BHA) and all hospital surgery centres in Catalonia (Spain). MEASUREMENTS: Information was collected by structured interview of managers of each centre on: availability of specialists, material off-loading and examination. The models were established according to the classification of Van Acker, and amputations from hospital discharge records.
resultsAn endocrinologist was available in 36.1% [confidence interval (CI) 95%:19.0-53.2] of the BHA and 11.1% [95% CI: 3.1-26.1] had a podiatrist,100% [95% CI: 90.3-100.0] had Doppler, 91.7% [95% CI:77.5-98.2] a monofilament, 5.6% [95% CI: 0.7-18.7] a quantitative tuning fork, 11.1% [95% CI:3,1-26, 1] material off-loading, and 8.3% [95% CI: 1.8 - 22.5] a specialist reference centre. A total of 85 surgical centres and hospitals dealt with these problems: 11(13.0%) excellent model, 29 (34.1%) intermediate and 45 (52.9%) basic/insufficient. Centres with a basic model/insufficient performed 12.5% of the amputation, intermediate models, 56.4%, and 31.1% in excellent models.
conclusionsThe proportion of ABS with materials, specialists and/or specialist reference centres was low. The basic/insufficient model was the most common among surgical/hospital centres. Most amputations were performed in centres with excellent and intermediate model; nevertheless, a considerable percentage was performed in centres with basic/insufficient models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.