ArticleNursing open2020
Intervention study of a foot-care programme enhancing knowledge and practice among nurses and care workers at in-home service providers.
Article in Nursing open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Educational Programmes on Knowledge and Practice Related to Diabetic Foot Care Among Nurses: A Systematic Review.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluation of the development process and effects of a foot care program with educational tools for nurses and care workers as in-home service providers.BMC research notes · 2020Article
- Intervention study of a foot-care programme enhancing knowledge and practice among nurses and care workers at in-home service providers.Nursing open · 2020Article
- Effects of Nurse and Care Worker-led Foot-Care Program on Older People's Foot Conditions: Before and After Intervention Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the foot-care educational programme for nurses and care workers at in-home service providers. Design: A non-randomized controlled study with random cluster sampling method. Methods: Study participants were nurses and care workers of 21 in-home service providers, including home-visit nursing and care providers, 1-day care service centres or care centres with rehabilitation programme in Japan. Foot-care programme with foot-care tools as a package or standard care comprising 3-5 sessions over 2 months was provided to 110 participants (87 were on analysis). The outcomes were changes in foot-care knowledge and scores in pre-post interventions. Data were analysed with descriptive statistics, Results: Before adjusting for background, total scores of knowledge and practice categories were higher than the baseline in the intervention group (43 participants) compared with the control group (44 participants). After background correction due to potential bias of non-random cluster sampling, significant between group differences were observed in mean score changes in skin and consultation subscales of the practice category.
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.