ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2020
Clinician Assessment Tools for Patients with Diabetic Foot Disease: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06092827 (Feasibility and Acceptability Study of a Non Weight-bearing Physical Activity Program for People With Diabetic Foot Ulceration), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Feasibility and Acceptability Study of a Non Weight-bearing Physical Activity Program for People With Diabetic Foot Ulceration (DB ACTIV)
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Measurement Properties of Instruments Used to Assess Diabetic Foot: An Umbrella Review.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Pooled it
- Diabetic foot disease: a systematic literature review of patient-reported outcome measures.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021Pooled it
- Diabetic neuropathy: cutting-edge research and future directions.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Article
- Risk prediction models for diabetic foot ulcer development or amputation: a review of reviews.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2023Review
- Repeatability, Completion Time, and Predictive Ability of Four Diabetes-Related Foot Ulcer Classification Systems.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Towards prevention of diabetic peripheral neuropathy: clinical presentation, pathogenesis, and new treatments.The Lancet. Neurology · 2022Review
- The SHID wound classification system for diabetic foot ulcer patients: a validity study.Journal of medicine and life · 2022Article
- Diabetes as an Isolated Cause of Minor Lower Limb Amputations.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2022Article
- Clinical, Pathological and Microbiological Evaluation of Diabetic Foot Syndrome.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The amputation rate in patients with diabetes is 15 to 40 times higher than in patients without diabetes. To avoid major complications, the identification of high-risk in patients with diabetes through early assessment highlights as a crucial action. Clinician assessment tools are scales in which clinical examiners are specifically trained to make a correct judgment based on patient outcomes that helps to identify at-risk patients and monitor the intervention. The aim of this study is to carry out a systematic review of valid and reliable Clinician assessment tools for measuring diabetic foot disease-related variables and analysing their psychometric properties. The databases used were PubMed, Scopus, SciELO, CINAHL, Cochrane, PEDro, and EMBASE. The search terms used were foot, ankle, diabetes, diabetic foot, assessment, tools, instruments, score, scale, validity, and reliability. The results showed 29 validated studies with 39 Clinician assessment tools and six variables. There is limited evidence on all of the psychometric characteristics of the Clinician assessment tools included in this review, although some instruments have been shown to be valid and reliable for the assessment of diabetic neuropathy (Utah Early Neuropathy Scale or UENS); ulceration risk (Queensland High Risk Foot Form or QHRFF); diabetic foot ulcer assessment, scoring, and amputation risk (Perfusion, extent, depth, infection and sensation scale or PEDIS and Site, Ischemia, Neuropathy, Bacterial Infection, and Depth score or SINBAD); and diabetic foot ulcer measurement (Leg Ulcer Measurement Tool LUMT).
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.