Diabetic Foot Complications in a Northern Canadian Aboriginal Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited access to basic foot care and protective footwear may contribute to diabetic foot complications. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of foot complications, ongoing foot care, and footwear use in diabetic subjects in a remote northern Canadian Aboriginal community. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional cohort study of 169 diabetic people, including interview, physical examination, and retrospective chart review. RESULTS: The mean age of the 169 diabetic individuals in the study was 56 +/- 12 years and their duration of diabetes 10 +/- 7 years. There were 139 (82%) individuals who had 418 diabetic foot complications (average, 3.0 complications per subject with complications), including toenail pathology, foot and ankle deformities, calluses, impaired pulses, neuropathy, past or present ulcer, amputation, and Charcot arthropathy. Risk classification showed that 69 (41%) individuals were at risk for future ulceration. Fifty-five (33%) individuals had inadequate footwear for their foot risk category, and only 11 (17%) of 66 individuals in the higher risk categories (categories 2 and 3) had suitable footwear. In a 7-year period, only 0.7 screening foot examinations per diabetic subject per year were documented. However, during this period, foot problems accounted for 498 (18%) local emergency room visits, 359 (16%) hospitalization days, 109 (11%) nonemergency transfers, and 4 (6%) emergency transfers to a tertiary care hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Foot and ankle complications of diabetes in this remote Aboriginal community were common and associated with substantial morbidity. Preventive diabetic foot screening examinations and footwear were inadequate. The results suggest that programs for prevention and early detection of complications are needed, including foot screening, provision of appropriate footwear, and foot care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".