Evidence mapPaperPMID 39235481Full record

SynthesisActa diabetologica2024

Prevention of foot ulcers recurrence in patients with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the development of the italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome.

Roberto Da Ros, Antonio Volpe, Corrado Bordieri, Rodolfo Tramonta, Andrea Bernetti, Alessia Scatena, Luca Monge, Benedetta Ragghianti, Antonio Silverii, Luigi Uccioli and 4 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta diabetologica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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.

Roberto Da RosAzienda Sanitaria Universitaria Giuliana Isontina, Monfalcone, Italy. roberto.daros@asugi.sanita.fvg.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6526-4216
Antonio VolpePoliclinico Abano Terme, Padua, Italy.
Corrado BordieriUniversita Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Rodolfo Tramonta, Civitavecchia, Italy.
Andrea BernettiUniversità del Salento, Lecce, Italy.
Alessia Scatena, Ospedale San Donato, Arezzo, Italy.
Luca MongeAMD Italian Association of Clinical Diabetologists, Rome, Italy.
Benedetta RagghiantiAzienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi and University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Antonio SilveriiAzienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi and University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Luigi UccioliSE/CTO Hospitals ASL Roma2, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Cristiana VermigliAzienda Ospedaliera Santa Maria Della Misericordia, Ospedale Di Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
Matteo MonamiAzienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi and University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Cesare MirandaPordenone Hospital, Pordenone, Italy.
Panel of the Italian Guidelines for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Syndrome and on behalf of SID and AMD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare the effectiveness of preventive interventions in reducing reccurrent diabetic foot ulcers. Meta-analysis (MA) was conducted to address clinical questions on this topic of the Italian guidelines on diabetic foot.

methodsThis MA includes randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of various preventive interventions, namely: treatment of pre-ulcerative foot lesions, structured educational programs, psychological interventions and the use of therapeutic footwear to relieve plantar pressure in people with diabetes mellitus and a history of previous ulcers.

resultsA total of 731 studies were identified and 14 were considered eligible for the analysis. We found that treatments of pre-ulcerative foot lesions did not provide any statistically significant effects (MH-OR: 0.84 [0.31, 2.33], p = 0.74, I

conclusionsThe study provides low-certainty evidence that, among preventive strategies in patients with previous DFU, rigid-sole therapeutic footwear and structured education programs are capable of reducing the risk of foot re-ulceration.

Indexed as

Diabetic FootRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicFoot UlcerHumansItalyPractice Guidelines as TopicRecurrenceSecondary PreventionShoesDiabetes mellitusDiabetic foot syndromePreventionUlcer recurrence

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.