ReviewDiabetology international2021
A review of the current evidence on the sensitivity and specificity of the Ipswich touch test for the screening of loss of protective sensation in patients with diabetes mellitus.
Review in Diabetology international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bibliometric Analysis: Insights Into the Podiatric Medicine Landscape of Diabetic Sensory Peripheral Neuropathy and Genomics.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Screening Tests for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: An Umbrella Review.Journal of diabetes research · 2024Review
- Comparing the Ipswich Touch Test (IpTT) and 10gm-SMWF (10-gm Semmes-Weinstein mono-filament) in Indian population subset with type 2 diabetes mellitus to detect diabetes neuropathy.Irish journal of medical science · 2023Article
- Screening for diabetic peripheral neuropathy in resource-limited settings.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2023Review
- Peripheral Neuropathy in Diabetes Mellitus: Pathogenetic Mechanisms and Diagnostic Options.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the Ipswich touch test for the screening of loss of protective sensation in patients with diabetes mellitus based on the current literature.
methodsThree electronic databases were searched for eligible studies that investigated the sensitivity and specificity of the Ipswich touch test. Methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.
resultsFive studies that reported the sensitivity and specificity of the Ipswich touch test were included. When compared to the 10 g monofilament, the sensitivity ranges from 51 to 83.3% and the specificity ranges from 96.4 to 98%. When compared to the vibration perception test ≥25 V, Ipswich touch test sensitivity ranges from 76 to 100% and specificity ranges from 90 to 96.6%.
conclusionsThe Ipswich touch test has a high specificity in screening for loss of protective sensation in the feet of patients with diabetes mellitus. It is a useful test to be included in diabetic foot screenings, especially when other sensory tools are not available. However, more rigorous studies need to be conducted as there is currently only a limited pool of research evidence to substantiate it as a screening tool for loss of protective sensation in the diabetic foot.
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.