Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35480853›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care

Evaluation of the North West London Diabetes Foot Care Transformation Project: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation.

Raffaele Palladino, Ash More, Geva Greenfield, Nana Anokye, Elizabeth Pigott, Tony Willis, Gregg Edward, Azeem Majeed, Wing May Kong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of integrated care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Moving forward, leaving the patients behind? A multilevel assessment framework for evaluating patient-centred, integrated care quality.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Raffaele PalladinoDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, the UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3437-812X
Ash MoreNorth West London Health and Care Partnership, NHS, London, the UK.
Geva GreenfieldDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, the UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9779-2486
Nana AnokyeDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, the UK.
Elizabeth PigottNorth West London Health and Care Partnership, NHS, London, the UK.
Tony WillisNorth West London Health and Care Partnership, NHS, London, the UK.
Gregg EdwardDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, the UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2381-6822
Azeem MajeedDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, the UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2357-9858
Wing May KongDepartment of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Central Middlesex Hospital, LMWUH NHS Trust, London, the UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S019669/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Diabetes foot ulceration (DFU) presents an enormous burden to those living with diabetes and to the local health systems and economies. There is an increasing interest in implementing integrated care models to enhance the quality of care for people living with diabetes and related complications and the value of co-production approaches to achieve sustainable change. This paper aims to describe the evaluation methodology for the North West London (NWL) Diabetes Foot Care Transformation project. Description: A mixed methods design including: i) a quasi-experimental quantitative analysis assessing the impact of the implementation of the local secondary care multi-disciplinary diabetes foot team clinics on service utilisation and clinical outcomes (amputations and number of healed patients); ii) a phenomenological, qualitative study to explore patient and staff experience; and iii) a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (pre and post 2017) to evaluate the programme cost-effectiveness. Discussion and Conclusion: Demonstrating the impact of multidisciplinary, integrated care models and the value of co-production approaches is important for health providers and commissioners trying to improve health outcome. Evaluation is also needed to identify strategies to overcome barriers which might have reduced the impact of the programme and key elements for improvement.

Indexed as

diabetesdiabetes foot caremixed-method evaluationprotocol

Identifiers

PMID35480853
PMCPMC8992770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.