ArticleJournal of foot and ankle research2014
The Queensland high risk foot form (QHRFF) - is it a reliable and valid clinical research tool for foot disease?
Article in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Factors for Foot-Related Hospitalisations in Adults With and Without Diabetes: A Systematic Review.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2026Pooled it
- Australian guideline on diagnosis and management of peripheral artery disease: part of the 2021 Australian evidence-based guidelines for diabetes-related foot disease.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2022Guideline
- Cognitive Impairment in People With Diabetes-Related Foot Ulcers: A Multicentre, Case-Control, Observational Study.International wound journal · 2026Observational
- The incidence of and risk factors for hospitalisations and amputations for people with diabetes-related foot ulcers in Queensland, 2011-19: an observational cohort study.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Observational
- Risk prediction models for diabetic foot ulcer development or amputation: a review of reviews.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2023Review
- Self-Monitoring Diabetes-Related Foot Ulcers with the MyFootCare App: A Mixed Methods Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Australian guideline on offloading treatment for foot ulcers: part of the 2021 Australian evidence-based guidelines for diabetes-related foot disease.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2022Article
- Clinician Assessment Tools for Patients with Diabetic Foot Disease: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Effects of acute wearable resistance loading on overground running lower body kinematics.PloS one · 2020Article
- Moderate-to-Vigorous-Intensity Physical Activity Observed in People With Diabetes-Related Foot Ulcers Over a One-Week Period.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2019Article
- Factors associated with type of footwear worn inside the house: a cross-sectional study.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2019Article
- Factors associated with wearing inadequate outdoor footwear in populations at risk of foot ulceration: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2019Article
- Independent factors associated with wearing different types of outdoor footwear in a representative inpatient population: a cross-sectional study.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2018Observational
- Differences in the daily activity of patients with diabetic foot ulcers compared to controls in their free-living environments.International wound journal · 2017Article
- The validity and reliability of remote diabetic foot ulcer assessment using mobile phone images.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- The silent overall burden of foot disease in a representative hospitalised population.International wound journal · 2017Article
- Foot Complications in a Representative Australian Inpatient Population.Journal of diabetes research · 2017Article
- Incidence and risk factors for developing infection in patients presenting with uninfected diabetic foot ulcers.PloS one · 2017Article
- Direct inpatient burden caused by foot-related conditions: a multisite point-prevalence study.BMJ open · 2016Observational
- Prevalence of active foot disease and foot disease risk factors in a subacute inpatient rehabilitation facility: a cross-sectional prevalence study.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFoot disease complications, such as foot ulcers and infection, contribute to considerable morbidity and mortality. These complications are typically precipitated by "high-risk factors", such as peripheral neuropathy and peripheral arterial disease. High-risk factors are more prevalent in specific "at risk" populations such as diabetes, kidney disease and cardiovascular disease. To the best of the authors' knowledge a tool capturing multiple high-risk factors and foot disease complications in multiple at risk populations has yet to be tested. This study aimed to develop and test the validity and reliability of a Queensland High Risk Foot Form (QHRFF) tool.
methodsThe study was conducted in two phases. Phase one developed a QHRFF using an existing diabetes foot disease tool, literature searches, stakeholder groups and expert panel. Phase two tested the QHRFF for validity and reliability. Four clinicians, representing different levels of expertise, were recruited to test validity and reliability. Three cohorts of patients were recruited; one tested criterion measure reliability (n = 32), another tested criterion validity and inter-rater reliability (n = 43), and another tested intra-rater reliability (n = 19). Validity was determined using sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values (PPV). Reliability was determined using Kappa, weighted Kappa and intra-class correlation (ICC) statistics.
resultsA QHRFF tool containing 46 items across seven domains was developed. Criterion measure reliability of at least moderate categories of agreement (Kappa > 0.4; ICC > 0.75) was seen in 91% (29 of 32) tested items. Criterion validity of at least moderate categories (PPV > 0.7) was seen in 83% (60 of 72) tested items. Inter- and intra-rater reliability of at least moderate categories (Kappa > 0.4; ICC > 0.75) was seen in 88% (84 of 96) and 87% (20 of 23) tested items respectively.
conclusionsThe QHRFF had acceptable validity and reliability across the majority of items; particularly items identifying relevant co-morbidities, high-risk factors and foot disease complications. Recommendations have been made to improve or remove identified weaker items for future QHRFF versions. Overall, the QHRFF possesses suitable practicality, validity and reliability to assess and capture relevant foot disease items across multiple at risk populations.
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.