Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41654836›Full record

ReviewBMC medical informatics and decision making2026

A narrative review of clinical decision support systems in offloading footwear for diabetic foot ulcers.

Kunal Kumar, Muhammad Ashad Kabir, Luke Donnan, Sayed Ahmed

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Research Progress on Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2026
    Review
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

4 authors.

Kunal KumarSchool of Computing, Mathematics and Engineering, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, NSW, 2795, Australia. kukumar@csu.edu.au.
Muhammad Ashad KabirSchool of Computing, Mathematics and Engineering, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, NSW, 2795, Australia. akabir@csu.edu.au.
Luke DonnanSchool of Allied Health, Exercise and Sports Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Albury, NSW, 2640, Australia.
Sayed AhmedFoot Balance Technology Pty Ltd, Castle Hill, NSW, 2154, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOffloading footwear is a critical intervention for preventing and treating diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), as it reduces plantar pressure (PP) and promotes healing. However, decision-making around its prescription remains fragmented, with variability in feature selection, limited personalization, and diverse evaluation approaches. While guidelines, knowledge-based systems, and machine learning (ML) applications have explored elements of decision-making, no clinical decision support system (CDSS) currently exists to provide feature-level prescriptions.

methodsWe conducted a narrative review of 45 studies, including 12 guidelines/protocols, 25 knowledge-based systems, and eight ML applications. Studies published from inception to August 2025 were included. Studies were thematically analyzed by type of knowledge, decision logic, evaluation methods, and associated technologies.

resultsGuidelines emphasize PP thresholds (≤200 kPa or ≥25–30% reduction) but lack detailed outputs. Knowledge-based systems apply rule-based and sensor-driven logic, integrating PP monitoring, adherence tracking, and usability testing. ML applications introduce predictive classification, optimization, and generative models, achieving high computational accuracy but with limited explainability and clinical validation. Evaluation practices remain fragmented: biomechanical testing dominates protocols, usability and adherence assessments are common in knowledge-based systems, while ML studies emphasize technical accuracy without linking to long-term clinical outcomes. From this synthesis, we propose a five-component framework for CDSS development that discusses: (1) minimum viable dataset, (2) hybrid decision architecture combining rules, optimization, and explainable ML, (3) structured feature-level outputs, (4) continuous validation and evaluation, and (5) integration into clinical and telehealth workflows.

conclusionThe proposed framework presents a pathway to transform fragmented approaches into scalable, patient-centered CDSSs. Prioritizing interoperable datasets, explainable models, and outcome-driven evaluation will be critical for clinical adoption and improved DFU care.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalDiabetic FootShoesHumansClinical decision support systemsDiabetic foot ulcerOffloading footwearOrthoticsPlantar pressurePrecision medicineUlcer healing

Identifiers

PMID41654836
PMCPMC12977444

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.