Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39788763›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Diabetic foot ulcer photography study: a study within a trial to assess the reliability of two-dimensional (2D) photography for the assessment of ulcer healing in patients with diabetes-related foot ulcers-protocol paper.

Sarah Tess Brown, Howard Collier, Lucy Askew, Rachael Mary Gilberts, Linda D Sharples, Jane Nixon, Elizabeth McGinnis, Michael Backhouse, Frances Game, Phil Faulks and 4 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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. Swabs versus tissue samples for infected diabetic foot ulcers: the CODIFI2 RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Observational
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

14 authors.

Sarah Tess BrownClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK sarahtessbrown@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1840-3786
Howard CollierClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Lucy AskewClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Rachael Mary GilbertsClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3326-7900
Linda D SharplesMedical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0894-966X
Jane NixonClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Elizabeth McGinnisClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2848-9149
Michael BackhouseUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0056-8467
Frances GameDepartment of Diabetes, National Health Service, Derby, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5294-4789
Phil FaulksDigital education Service, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Myka RansomClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4359-8287
Colin Charles EverettClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9788-840X
E Andrea NelsonGlasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
David RussellClinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1293-5618

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe primary endpoint in diabetes-related foot ulcer (DFU) trials is often time to healing, defined as complete re-epithelialisation with absence of drainage, requiring clinical expert assessment as the gold standard. Central blinded photograph review for confirmation of healing is increasingly being undertaken for internal validity. The Diabetic Foot Ulcer Photography study aims to determine the agreement between blinded independent review panel members for assessing ulcer healing status in patients with DFUs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Photographs of ulcers clinically assessed as healed or not healed across 300 participants recruited to one of two randomised controlled trials (MIDFUT and CODIFI2), will be independently reviewed by a central blinded panel consisting of four clinicians with expertise in ulcer healing assessment. Staff at recruiting sites will take photographs using a standardised camera and protocol. Photographs will be reviewed at three levels of magnification: raw image, image standardised to a measurement scale included in the photograph and standardised image with magnification permitted. Reviewers will assess the healing status and their confidence level in making a healing judgement, with reasons reported for a low confidence rating. Analysis at each level of magnification will estimate inter- and intra-rater reliability on the assessments of healing of photographs with the clinical assessment (primary) and confidence rating using multivariable logistic mixed models. Analysis of the learning curve for the assessment of healing and confidence rating will use exponential and two-phase models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by the National Research Ethics Service Committees (MIDFUT 17/YH/0055; CODIFI2 18-WS-0235). All participants will provide a written informed consent for photography before recruited onto the respective study. Photographs will be transferred to the trials' coordinating centre via a secure file transfer service and saved in a restricted access folder on a secure server. Results will be disseminated via publications in scientific journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: MIDFUT (ISRCTN64926597) and CODIFI2 (ISRCTN74929588).

Indexed as

Diabetic FootPhotographyWound HealingHumansObserver VariationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignClinical TrialDiabetic footSTATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS

Identifiers

PMID39788763
PMCPMC11752009

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.