ArticleBMJ public health2026
Socioeconomic predictors of diabetic foot ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the association between socioeconomic factors and diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) among adults with diabetes mellitus through systematic review and meta-analysis. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Data sources: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL and Google Scholar were systematically searched from database inception to 31 December 2024, with a final updated search performed in February 2025. Eligibility criteria: Cross-sectional and case-control studies evaluating the association between socioeconomic factors and DFUs among adults with diabetes mellitus were included. Data extraction and synthesis: Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for cross-sectional studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for case-control studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool ORs and corresponding 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Results: Eight cross-sectional and case-control studies involving 3488 participants were included. Lower educational attainment was significantly associated with higher odds of DFUs (pooled OR=2.54, 95% CI 1.24 to 5.20; I² = 68.0%). Similarly, lack of formal employment was associated with higher odds of DFUs (pooled OR=1.71, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.77; I² = 21.2%). In contrast, although low income showed increased pooled odds of DFUs, the association did not reach statistical significance under the random-effects model (pooled OR=2.70, 95% CI 0.36 to 20.41; I² = 81.9%). Interpretation of the income analysis was limited by substantial heterogeneity and wide CIs. Sensitivity analyses excluding moderate-to-high risk studies demonstrated similar directions of association for education and occupational status. Conclusions: Lower educational attainment and lack of formal employment were associated with higher odds of DFUs among individuals with diabetes mellitus. These findings suggest that socioeconomic factors should be considered in diabetic foot prevention and management strategies alongside conventional clinical risk factors. Further high-quality prospective studies using standardised socioeconomic measures are needed to strengthen the evidence base in this area.
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.