Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34372789›Full record

SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2021

The microbiology of diabetic foot infections: a meta-analysis.

Katherine E Macdonald, Sophie Boeckh, Helen J Stacey, Joshua D Jones

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 119 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
119citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
17.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT07325786 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

A Novel Method for the Examination of Infected Wound Specimens: Percutaneous Wound Sampling With Analysis in Blood Culture (PERKA-B) Method

TypeinterventionalSponsorProf. Dr. Bülent M. ErtuğrulRan2025 to 2026Enrolled300ConditionsWound Infection Bacterial, IdentificationArmsTissue culture collection
NCT07391995 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of a New Diagnostic Tool (MinION) for Identifying Microorganisms in the Foot Wounds of Patients Living With Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis (DFOM)

TypeobservationalSponsorCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de NīmesRan2026 to 2026Enrolled43ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Diabetes Complications, Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

119 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 181 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. The global epidemiology of MRSA.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. A Survey of the Microbiome, Culturome and ARG Profile of a Cohort of Chronic Diabetic Foot Lesions.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

59 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Katherine E MacdonaldInfection Medicine, Edinburgh Medical School: Biomedical Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Chancellor's Building, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK.
Sophie BoeckhFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, 3605 Rue de la Montagne, Montreal, QC, H3G 2M1, Canada.
Helen J StaceyEdinburgh Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Chancellor's Building, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK.
Joshua D JonesInfection Medicine, Edinburgh Medical School: Biomedical Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Chancellor's Building, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK. josh.jones@ed.ac.uk.
University of Edinburgh · GBMcGill University · CA

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_18046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetic foot ulcers are a common complication of poorly controlled diabetes and often become infected, termed diabetic foot infection. There have been numerous studies of the microbiology of diabetic foot infection but no meta-analysis has provided a global overview of these data. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the prevalence of bacteria isolated from diabetic foot infections using studies of any design which reported diabetic foot infection culture results.

methodsThe Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and BIOSIS electronic databases were searched for studies published up to 2019 which contained microbiological culture results from at least 10 diabetic foot infection patients. Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and extracted the data. The main outcome was the prevalence of each bacterial genera or species.

resultsA total of 112 studies were included, representing 16,159 patients from which 22,198 microbial isolates were obtained. The organism most commonly identified was Staphylococcus aureus, of which 18.0% (95% CI 13.8-22.6%; I

conclusionThe microbiology of diabetic foot infections is diverse, but S. aureus predominates. The correlation between the prevalence of Gram positive and negative organisms and Gross National Income could reflect differences in healthcare provision and sanitation. This meta-analysis has synthesised multiple datasets to provide a global overview of the microbiology of diabetic foot infections that will help direct the development of novel therapeutics.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic FootStaphylococcal InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsEscherichia coliHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsStaphylococcus aureusAnti-Bacterial AgentsDiabetesDiabetic foot infectionDiabetic foot ulcerMeta-analysisMicrobiologyPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID34372789
PMCPMC8351150
OpenAlexW3190321652

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.