ArticleJMIR diabetes2026
User-Centered Development of a Digital Health Service for Diabetic Foot Ulcer Risk Stratification: Usability Study.
Article in JMIR diabetes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond clinical closure: functional skin barrier recovery to prevent diabetic foot ulcer recurrence: a narrative review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Globally, 537 million persons live with diabetes, and a lifetime risk of up to 34% of developing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) necessitates strengthened preventive initiatives. Objective: The study aimed to develop and evaluate a clinical decision support system (CDSS) to be used by health care professionals in foot assessment and risk stratification as a base for prevention. Methods: Based on principles of human-computer interaction, the CDSS was developed for DFU risk assessment. Users, health care professionals from Region Västra Götaland in Sweden, evaluated the functions regarding effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction using a mixed methods usability testing approach. Expectations and experiences of using the CDSS were evaluated with the System Usability Scale (SUS). Results: A total of 9 participants participated. User expectations of the CDSS, measured by SUS, averaged 77.2 (SD 14.6). Posttest SUS scores were 68.9 (SD 14.3), with a mean difference of 8.3 (P=.07), a nonsignificant reduction of usability after testing. The effectiveness of the CDSS in supporting users to complete 9 clinical tasks showed that for 7 (78%) tasks, at least 5 (56%) testers successfully achieved the intended goals. Tasks involving the identification of ingrown toenails and the confirmation of foot status, including risk stratification for the patient, were completed by fewer testers. Efficiency, measured as mean task completion time, ranged from 7 seconds to 9 minutes 20 seconds, and qualitative feedback informed recommendations for further system refinement. Users reported that a structured CDSS has the potential to support more equitable, consistent, and person-centered DFU prevention within a digital health service. Conclusions: A digital health service for DFU risk stratification was developed based on national and international guidelines. Although the users' expectations of the usability were higher compared to how they experienced the CDSS, the SUS test was near a threshold of 70, indicating that the system being tested was above average in usability. Further development and validation, both nationally and internationally, with continued attention to users' needs and contextual factors, are recommended.
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.