Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prognosis of the infected diabetic foot ulcer: a 12‐month prospective observational study

Open access
Ndosi, M., Wright‐Hughes, A., Brown, S., Backhouse, M., Lipsky, B. A., Bhogal, M., Reynolds, C., Vowden, P., Jude, E. B., Nixon, J., Nelson, E. A.·2018·Diabetic Medicine

Abstract

Aims: To determine clinical outcomes and explore prognostic factors related to ulcer healing in people with a clinically infected diabetic foot ulcer. Methods: This multicentre, prospective, observational study reviewed participants’ data at 12 months after culture of a diabetic foot ulcer requiring antibiotic therapy. From participants’ notes, we obtained information on the incidence of wound healing, ulcer recurrence, lower extremity amputation, lower extremity revascularization and death. We estimated the cumulative incidence of healing at 6 and 12 months, adjusted for lower extremity amputation and death using a competing risk analysis, and explored the relationship between baseline factors and healing incidence. Results: In the first year after culture of the index ulcer, 45/299 participants (15.1%) had died. The ulcer had healed in 136 participants (45.5%), but recurred in 13 (9.6%). An ipsilateral lower extremity amputation was recorded in 52 (17.4%) and revascularization surgery in 18 participants (6.0%). Participants with an ulcer present for ~2 months or more had a lower incidence of healing (hazard ratio 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.77), as did those with a PEDIS (perfusion, extent, depth, infection, sensation) perfusion grade of ≥2 (hazard ratio 0.37, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.55). Participants with a single ulcer on their index foot had a higher incidence of healing than those with multiple ulcers (hazard ratio 1.90, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.06). Conclusions: Clinical outcomes at 12 months for people with an infected diabetic foot ulcer are generally poor. Our data confirm the adverse prognostic effect of limb ischaemia, longer ulcer duration and the presence of multiple ulcers.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/dme.13537

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 27 references

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Ndosi, M., Wright‐Hughes, A., Brown, S., Backhouse, M., Lipsky, B. A., Bhogal, M., Reynolds, C., Vowden, P., Jude, E. B., Nixon, J., & Nelson, E. A.
Venue
Diabetic Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-11-20
Volume
35
Issue
1
Pages
78-88
ISSN
  • 0742-3071 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5491
OpenAlex
W2766300169
Cited by
287
References
27
FWCI
11.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prognosis of the infected diabetic foot ulcer: a 12‐month prospective observational study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/dme.13537
The paper
Ndosi, M., Wright‐Hughes, A., Brown, S., Backhouse, M., Lipsky, B. A., Bhogal, M., Reynolds, C., Vowden, P., Jude, E. B., Nixon, J., & Nelson, E. A. (2018). Prognosis of the infected diabetic foot ulcer: a 12‐month prospective observational study. Diabetic Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.13537

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.