Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38015974›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Prevalence of diabetic foot at risk of ulcer development and its components stratification according to the international working group on the diabetic foot (IWGDF): A systematic review with metanalysis.

Tania Maldonado-Valer, Luis F Pareja-Mujica, Rodrigo Corcuera-Ciudad, Fernando Andres Terry-Escalante, Mylenka Jennifer Chevarría-Arriaga, Tery Vasquez-Hassinger, Marlon Yovera-Aldana

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Advances in the Role of Stem Cell-Derived Exosomes in Diabetic Foot Wound Healing.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2025
    Review
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

7 authors.

Tania Maldonado-ValerUniversidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru.
Luis F Pareja-MujicaUniversidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru.
Rodrigo Corcuera-CiudadUniversidad Científica del Sur, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Medicina Humana, CHANGE Research Working Group, Lima, Peru.
Fernando Andres Terry-EscalanteUniversidad de San Martín de Porres, Facultad de Medicina Humana. Lima, Peru.ORCID 0000-0002-2177-1643
Mylenka Jennifer Chevarría-ArriagaUniversidad de San Martín de Porres, Facultad de Medicina Humana. Lima, Peru.
Tery Vasquez-HassingerUniversidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru.ORCID 0000-0002-9209-8994
Marlon Yovera-AldanaGrupo de Investigación en Neurociencias, Efectividad Clínica y Salud Pública, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru.ORCID 0000-0002-1947-7736

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo determine the overall prevalence of diabetic foot at risk according to the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot stratification. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe searched PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. We included cross-sectional studies or cohorts from 1999 to March 2022. We performed a meta-analysis of proportions using a random-effects model. We assessed heterogeneity through subgroup analysis by continent and other characteristics.

resultsWe included 36 studies with a total population of 11,850 people from 23 countries. The estimated overall prevalence of diabetic foot at risk was 53.2% (95% CI: 45.1-61.3), I2 = 98.7%, p < 0.001. In the analysis by subgroups, South and Central America had the highest prevalence and Africa the lowest. The factors explaining the heterogeneity were the presence of chronic kidney disease, diagnostic method for peripheral arterial disease, and quality. The estimates presented very low certainty of evidence.

conclusionsThe overall prevalence of diabetic foot at risk is high. The high heterogeneity between continents can be explained by methodological aspects and the type of population. However, using the same classification is necessary for standardization of the way of measuring the components, as well as better designed general population-based studies.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic FootAfricaCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPrevalenceUlcer

Identifiers

PMID38015974
PMCPMC10684108

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.