ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2019
Work ability and productivity in patients with diabetic foot.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Single Use and Traditional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Devices in Lower Extremity Ulcers: A US Real-World Evidence Analysis of NetHealth Data.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Clinic-mycological spectrum ofCurrent medical mycology · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- The Association of Oral Stimulant Medication Adherence with Work Productivity among Adults with ADHD.Journal of attention disorders · 2022Article
- Diabetes severity measured by treatment control status and number of anti-diabetic drugs affects presenteeism among workers with type 2 diabetes.BMC public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess work ability and productivity in patients with diabetic foot.
methodsThis investigation was a cross-sectional controlled study. A total of 117 individuals were selected from March to June 2014 and allocated to group A (patients without diabetes, n=43), group B (diabetes patients without foot ulcers, n=43), or group C (patients with diabetic foot, n=31). Two validated instruments, the Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire General Health v2.0 (WPAI-GH), were used to assess work ability and productivity.
resultsThe groups were homogeneous regarding age and sex; however, patients in group C had a lower education level than the other participants (p=0.006). The median WLQ scores for groups A, B, and C were 0.0121, 0.0146, and 0.0852, respectively (p<0.0001). The WPAI-GH scores revealed a mean productivity loss of 20% for groups A and B and 100% for group C (p<0.0001).
conclusionsPatients with diabetic foot showed decreased work ability and productivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.