ArticlePloS one2026
A scoping review of computational models of the diabetic foot.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prevalence of diabetes is expected to be 650 million people by 2030, and diabetic foot ulceration (DFU) is one of its most severe complications. It poses a significant challenge to global health and brings substantial social and economic burdens. Although many studies have explored the mechanisms of DFU development, they are still not fully understood. Due to the high cost of the experimental research, many recent studies have employed the computational modelling approaches to simulate the effects of diabetes on foot tissues from mechanical, thermal, fluid, and cellular perspectives. This study aims to provide a comprehensive review of computational modelling approaches used to investigate various factors influencing DFU, discuss current knowledge gaps and limitations, and outline future research directions. A systematic search was conducted in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases, identifying a total of N = 1631 records up to March 2025, 31 of which studies met the inclusion criteria and were analysed in this study. Results showed that DFU-related computational models can be categorized into five types: mechanical stress models, thermal models, vascular and nerve system models, multiphysics models, and cellular-based models. These models explore the formation mechanisms of DFU from different perspectives, including biomechanics, temperature, fluid dynamics, HHμm neural signalling, and cellular responses. However, except for mechanical stress models, the other approaches remain in the early stages of development, and the single physics modelling strategies are unable to provide understanding on the coupled processes with the foot and their effect on DFU. Future research should further develop modelling approaches and couple these together to develop comprehensive understanding of DFU pathogenesis.
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.