Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32371531›Full record

ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2020

Predicting the risk of future diabetic foot ulcer occurrence: a prospective cohort study of patients with diabetes in Tanzania.

Roozbeh Naemi, Nachiappan Chockalingam, Janet K Lutale, Zulfiqarali G Abbas

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07031141 (Diabetes Foot Africa Region Registry), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07031141 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Diabetes Foot Africa Region Registry

TypeobservationalSponsorGetz PharmaRan2025 to 2027Enrolled2,000ConditionsDiabetes
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Roozbeh NaemiSchool of Life Sciences and Education, Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK r.naemi@staffs.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2998-2883
Nachiappan ChockalingamSchool of Life Sciences and Education, Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7072-1271
Janet K LutaleMuhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Zulfiqarali G AbbasMuhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences · TZUniversity of Staffordshire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to identify the parameters that predict the risk of future foot ulcer occurrence in patients with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methods1810 (male (M)/female (F): 1012/798) patients, with no foot ulcer at baseline, participated in this study. Data from a set of 28 parameters were collected at baseline. During follow-up, 123 (M/F: 68/55) patients ulcerated. Survival analyses together with logistic regression were used to identify the parameters that could predict the risk of future diabetic foot ulcer occurrence.

resultsA number of parameters (HR (95% CI)) including neuropathy (2.525 (1.680 to 3.795)); history of ulceration (2.796 (1.029 to 7.598)); smoking history (1.686 (1.097 to 2.592)); presence of callus (1.474 (0.999 to 2.174)); nail ingrowth (5.653 (2.078 to 15.379)); foot swelling (3.345 (1.799 to 6.218)); dry skin (1.926 (1.273 to 2.914)); limited ankle (1.662 (1.365 to 2.022)) and metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint (2.745 (1.853 to 4.067)) ranges of motion; and decreased (3.141 (2.102 to 4.693)), highly decreased (5.263 (1.266 to 21.878)), and absent (9.671 (5.179 to 18.059)) sensation to touch; age (1.026 (1.010 to 1.042)); vibration perception threshold (1.079 (1.060 to 1.099)); duration of diabetes (1.000 (1.000 to 1.000)); and plantar pressure at the first metatarsal head (1.003 (1.001 to 1.005)), temperature sensation (1.019 (1.004 to 1.035)) and temperature tolerance (1.523 (1.337 to 1.734)) thresholds to hot stimuli and blood sugar level (1.027 (1.006 to 1.048)) were all significantly associated with increased risk of ulceration. However, plantar pressure underneath the fifth toe (0.990 (0.983 to 0.998)) and temperature sensation (0.755 (0.688 to 0.829)) and temperature tolerance (0.668 (0.592 to 0.0754)) thresholds to cold stimuli showed to significantly decrease the risk of future ulcer occurrence. Multivariate survival model indicated that nail ingrowth (4.42 (1.38 to 14.07)); vibration perception threshold (1.07 (1.04 to 1.09)); dry skin status (4.48 (1.80 to 11.14)); and temperature tolerance threshold to warm stimuli (1.001 (1.000 to 1.002)) were significant predictors of foot ulceration risk in the final model. The mean time to ulceration was significantly (p<0.05) shorter for patients with: dry skin (χ

conclusionNail ingrowth and dry skin were found to be strong indicators of vulnerability of patients to diabetic foot ulceration. Results highlight that assessments of neuropathy in relation to both small and larger fiber impairment need to be considered for predicting the risk of diabetic foot ulceration.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diabetic FootDiabetic NeuropathiesFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesRisk FactorsTanzaniaAfricansfoot biomechancisfoot ulcerneuropathy

Identifiers

PMID32371531
PMCPMC7228475
OpenAlexW3023853802

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.